GIFT   OF 


DOCUMfcNTB 
DEPT. 


GOVERNOR  CHARLES  S.  WHITMAN 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


PRELIMINARY  REPORT 


OF    THE 


Joint  Legislative  Committee 


ON 


Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 

Poultry 


TRANSMITTED  TO  THE  LEGISLATURE  FEBRUARY  15,  1917 


ALBANY 

J.  B.  LYON  COMPANY,  PRINTERS 
1917 


£ 


CONTENTS 


Pag* 

Agricultural   Efficiency 39-  40 

Animal  Diseases,  Money  needed  for  Study  of 880-881 

Bacteria,  How   Counted    >j  690-692 

Barn  Scoring,  Sample  Cards  used  in 641-660 

Barn   Score,  Value  of 673-677 

"  B  "  and  "  C  "  Milk  Mingled,  Prevalence  of 692-696 

Bonding  Act,  The  Milk  Buyers' 607-608 

Borden  Company,  Examination  of  Books  of  the 401-477 

Bovine  Tuberculosis,  Infection  of 690 

Broome  County,  Milk  Production  Survey  of 82-  83 

Butter  Fat  Tests,  Station  Records  of 243-244 

Butter,  Production  of 295 

Calves  and  Manure,  Value  of 61-62 

Campbell  Milk  Co.,  Inc.,  Alex.,  Examination  of  Books  of 497-511 

Chautauqua  County,  Cow  Testing  Averages  in 120 

Cheese,  Production  of 295 

Chemung  County,  Cow  Costs  in 70-77 

City  Market  Department,  Necessity  for 877 

Clover  Farms,  Inc.,  Examination  of  Books  of 515-530 

Cream  Samples,  Weighing  of 245-246 

Committee,  Creation  of  the -,: 3 

Committee,  Hearings  of  the 7-     8 

Committee,  Organization  of  the :. 5 

Costs,  Certified  Milk,  An  example  of 104 

Costs,  Inadequate  Terminals,   Factors  in 874-875 

Cow  Costs  per  Annum,  Average  of,  Including  Feed,  Labor  and  Over- 
head   136 

Cow  Returns,  Summary  of,  for  Dairy  Products  Sold 141-142 

Cows,  Number  in  this  State :.: 37 

Dairy  Farms  near  Earlville,  Summary  of  Business  of 86 

Dairy  Inspection,  Effect  of  Pasteurization  of 661-665 

Dairy  Products,  Introduction 36 

Dairymen,  Conditions  Intolerable  to  the ". 294 

Dairymen's  League,  Contractsi  of  the 186-187 

Dairymen's  League,  Formation  and  Purposes  of 20.V-308 

Dairymen  and  Milk  Distributors,  Antagonism  between 603-604 

Dairymen's  Stations,  Acquiring  Control  of 603 

Distribution,  Unnecessary  Costs  of 57C-578 

[iii] 


403239 


IV 

Page 

Dog  Law,  Present  State 30 

Dog  Law,  Proposed 30-  31 

Dutchess  County,  Survey  of. 66-  67 

Dye-stuffs,  Use  in  Ice  Cream  Manufacture. 780-781 

Egg  and  Butter  Investigation,  O'Malley  Report 849-865 

Elevator  Weights,  Shortages  in 832-846 

Farm  Exodus,  Tendency  towards 878 

Farm  Home,  Value  of  the 242-243 

Fat  Testa,  Boonville 257 

Fat  Tests,  Candor  Station 254-255 

Feed  Dealers'  Association,  History  and  Methods  of 789-793 

Feed  Dealers'  Association,  letters  from  and  to 793-832 

Feed  and  Labor  Costs,  A  Study  of 58-61 

Fight  for  Higher  Prices,  Bulletins  Used  in 309-322 

Food  Cost  and  Production,  Summary  of 132-133 

Food  Exports,  Increase  in 872 

Foods  and  Markets,  Joint  Report  on 869-891 

Foodstuffs,  Ignorance  of .: 872-873 

Gathering  Stations,  Ownership  and  Control  of 599-602 

Health  Regulations,  Benefit  of 611 

Ice  Cream,  Manufacture  of ^ 774-788 

Jefferson  County,  Survey  of 67-  70 

Manure  and  Calf,  Credits  for 137-140 

Markets,  Department  of,  Recommendations  for 881-883 

Market  Departments,  Municipal 883 

Market  Milk,  The  Supervision  of    610 

Market  Milk,  Unlawful  Skimming  of 614-640 

Market  Milk,  Value  of,  not  Controlled  by  Butter  and  Cheese  Prices.  135 

Market  Milk  Zone,  Extension  of  the  339-346 

Middlemen,  The  Creation  of .: 580-599 

Milk  Buying,  Methods  of : 142-143 

Milk  Contract,  Baumert  &  Co .: 162-163 

Milk  Contract,  Big  Elm  Dairy  Co 173 

Milk  Contract,  Borden's ,, 144-146 

Milk  Contract,  Brighton  Place  Dairy  Co 171-172 

Milk  Contract,  Alexander  Campbell  Company   147-148 

Milk  Contract,  Chemung  Dairy  Products  Co 167 

Milk  Contract,  Olover-Dale  Farms  Co 165-167 

Milk  Contract,  Farmers'  Co-Operative  Milk  Company 151-153 

Milk  Contract,  Fort  Plain  Milk  Co 156 


Page 

Milk  Contract,  Geneva  Milk  Co K.  170-171 

Milk  Contract,  Harlem  Dairy  Products  Company 155 

Milk  Contract,  Horseheads  Creamery  Co 167-168 

Milk  Contract,  Locust  Farms  Co 179-181 

Milk  Contract,  Merrell-Soule  Co 177-178 

Milk  Contract,  Orange  County  Milk  Assn 179 

Milk  Contract,  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson-Decker  Company. .  .148-150,  173-177 

Milk  Contract,  0.  A.  Weatherly  &  Company 154,  158-159 

Milk  Costs,  A  Summary  of 548-570 

Milk,  Cream  and  Condensed  Milk,  New  York  Market  Receipts  of 612 

Milk  Distribution,  Profits  in   573-576 

Milk  Distribution,  A  Regulated  Public  Service 578-580 

Milk  Powder,  Manufacture  of  :,: 768-774 

Milk  Prices,  Comparative 188-222 

Milk  Prices,  Comparative  by  Years .,  224-241 

Milk  Prices,  Comparative,  Merrell-Soule  Company 223 

Milk  Prices,  How  they  are  made 290-294 

Milk  Production,  Cost  of  in  this  State 40-41 

Milk  Production,  Cost  in  this  State  prior  to  1916 46-  55 

Milk  Production,  Cost  in  other  States 55 

Milk  Production,  Cost  of  in  New  England 42-  46 

Milk  Stations  and  Pasteurizing  Plants,  Inspection  of 665-668 

Milk  Trains,  Service  rendered  by 346-358 

Milk  Traffic,  Volume  of ^ 359 

Milk  Trust,  The 604-605 

Miniscus,  The T 246-248 

Montgomery  County,  Average  Cost  Milk  Production  in 109 

Mutual-McDermott  Dairy  Co.,  Examination  of  Books  of 534-542 

National  Commission  on  Milk  Standards,  History  of 742-751 

National  Commission  on  Milk  Standards,  Report  of 717-741 

New  York  Milk  Committee,  Report  on  Bovine  Tuberculosis 758-768 

North  Chemuhg  Cow  Testing  Association,  Averages  of 55-  56 

Pasteurization,  Necessity  of 683-685 

Pastures,  Value  of 133-135 

Profits  Distributors'  387-395 

Prosperity  of  the  Dairy  Industry,  Conditions  that  threaten a  38 

Public  Markets,  Need  for 875-876 

Regulations,  Production  and  'Sale  of  Milk,  New  York  City 696-714 

St.  Lawrence  University,  Production  Costs  at 56-  57 

Scoring,  Methods  used  in  various  cities a 668-671 

Sheep,  Decrease  of 10 

Sheep  versus  Dog 35 

Sheep,  Importance  of a g~  12 


Page 

Sheep-killing  Dogs,  The  Habits  of  the H 

Sheep,  Number  killed  annually  by  dogs 28-  29 

Sheffield  Farms  Slawson-Decker  Co.,  Examination  of  Books  of 482-494 

Testimony  of: 

Adams,  George  A 84 

Agan,  C.  H >-. .  262-263 

Aker,  Barnard 

Allen,  Lewis  F >: 23-24 

Allis,  Clark    -,. 19 

Arens,  Henry 256 

Arthur,  Eugene 115-116 

Benton,  William  A. , 125-127 

Brill,  Jacob  S 328-333 

Brown,  H.  J 129-130 

Boos,  C.  H. 87 

Boutelle,  C.  A 116-120 

Burgduff,  Mr 270-271 

Carver,  John  L 619-623 

Cavanaugh,  Prof.  George  W 770-774 

Chubbuck,  M.  E 70 

Clinch,  G.  W 96-97 

Cook,  Emmett  A. • 21-22 

Cortwright,   Floyd 12 

Cowles,  Arthur  A 833-836 

Crawford,  Addison    130-131 

Creswell,  J.  B. ,  121-122 

Day,  C.  B 636 

Deck,  Fred   92 

Dexter,  C.  E 624-631 

Dillon,  John  J.    360-380 

Doig,  J.  P ..,  20 

Doyle,  John  F 581-591 

Dundon,  James   269-270 

Eastman,  J.  F. 17-18 

Elliott,  H.  C 88 

Gahagan,  Thomas   .,  78-  79 

Gifford,  Curtis  F 107 

Gregory,  William  B 837-843 

Hildebrand,  George  380-383 

Hobey,   Mr 275-278 

Hook,  W.  H 124 

Hough,  F.  A.   91 

Jaycox,  J.  M ,.. . .  264-266 

Jelliffe,  Fred  L 383-385 

Jelliffe,  Maltby  B 385-387 

Jonies,  M.  C 92-  93 

Jordan,  Whitman  H 786-788 


Vll 

Lacy,  F.  H -fl  122-123 

Larmon,  Charles  W a.  16 

Leonard,  Ransom  L 14-  15 

Lindall,  Floyd   271-274 

Livermore,  H.  B.. ' & 91-  92 

Loson,  George   287-289 

McNamara,  John 19,  124-125 

Markham,  F.  S ^ 108-109 

Merchant,  Allen  S.   110-115 

Miller,  F.  T H 127 

Miller,  George   128 

Moore,  John  D »  .  .  181-186 

Morgan,   Godfrey    843-845 

Naninga,  Mr 10  279-282 

North,  Dr.  Charles  E 677-686 

Oher,  Christian 631-636 

Olgivie,  G.  R :.:. . . .  104-107 

Park,  William  H 686-692 

Peck,  Winfield  S 20,  83-84 

Phelps,  Charles  S 89-91 

Pratt,    Townsend    257-260 

Roff,  John 636 

Ross,  F.  0 : 94-95 

Ross,  G.  R :?:.  260-262 

Saybold,  Theodore  F 95-96 

Sloan,  G.  N :.: 285 

Smith,  Edwin  P 85 

Smith,  George  A 101-104 

Stark,  Charles 18 

Stevenson,  James  A 845 

Teall,  J.  R 98-101 

Troy,  H.  C 244-249 

Van  San,  N.  A 592-599 

Ward,  J.  G i: 20 

Whitbeck,  Henry  M 785 

Wicks,  Lucius  E ,0  14 

Wicks,  Prof.  Henry  M.   17 

Tests,  Accurate  to  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent 249 

Tests,  Average  of  Geneva  Farm  Herd 253 

Testsi,  Cherry  Valley   283 

Wharton  Valley,  Survey  of   > 64-  65 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


Governor  Charles  S.  Whitman Frontispiece 

Facing  page 

Senator  Charles  W.  Wicks,  Chairman  of  Committee 3 

Members  of  the  Committee 8 

Officers  and  Counsel  of  the  Joint  Legislative  Committee 8 

Sheep  killed  by  dogs  in  a  single  night 13 

A  prize  flock  of  sheep 22 

Dutchess  county's  champion  cow 32 

Pasture  scene  in  the  lower  Hudson  Valley 40 

A  June  day  in  the  Susquehanna  Valley 48 

A  New  York  State  oat  field 56 

Chart  giving  the  chemical  quality  of  New  York's  milk  for  four  years 64 

Chart  showing  the  average  monthly  per  cent  of  fat  and  solids  in  New  York 

City's  milk  for  five  years 72 

A  record  crop  of  ensilage 80 

Six  prize  winners  in  Cornell's  herd 88 

A  scene  in  a  New  York  State  hay  field 96 

Lewis  county  cheese 104 

Bean  field  near  Avon 112 

A  typical  New  York  State  farm 120 

The  beauties  of  the  Schoharie  Valley 128 

One  of  New  York's  picturesque  dairy  farms 136 

Threshing  a  banner  wheat  crop 144 

One  of  the  model  rural  schools  in  this  State 152 

A  sample  of  New  York  State's  diversified  scenery 160 

One  of  the  world's  record  herds 168 

The  proper  way  of  icing  milk  for  railroad  transportation 176 

The  sanitary  handling  of  milk  in  New  York  City 184 

A  milk  inspector  working  in  the  early  morning 192 

Washington  market,  New  York  City 200 

A  typical  East  Side  market  scene 208 

Egg  breaking  in  New  York  City  under  ideal  conditions 216 

One  of  New  York's  model  push  carts 224 


jki 


SENATOR  CHARLES  W.  WICKS,  Chairman 
Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and  Poultry 


STATE  OF   NEW   YORK 


]Sfo.  35 


IN     SENATES 

FEBRUARY  15,  191.7. 


PRELIMINARY  REPORT 

OF  THE 

JOINT   LEGISLATIVE   COMMITTEE   ON   DAIRY 
PRODUCTS,  LIVE-STOCK  AND  POULTRY 


To  the  Legislature  of  the  State  of  New  York: 

The  Joint  Legislative  Committee  appointed  pursuant  to  the 
joint  resolution  adopted  by  the  Senate  and  Assembly  of  the  'State 
of  New  York,  in  the  year  1916,  hereby  submits  the  following  pre- 
liminary report: 

CREATION  OF  COMMITTEE 

During  the  session  of  1916  the  following  resolution  was  adopted 
both  in  the  Senate  and  Assembly : 

"  WHEREAS,  It  is  alleged  that  the  distribution  of  milk  and 
butter,  eggs,  poultry  and  live-stock  produced  in  this  State 
is  controlled  by  combination  and  monopoly  of  dealers  and 
manipulation  of  prices  to  such  an  extent  as  to  reduce  pro- 
duction and  in  such  manner  as  to  impair  the  quality  and 
unduly  enhance  the  prices  to  consumers;  and 

'<(  WHEREAS,  It  is  further  alleged  that  such  practices  are 
becoming  more  and  more  aggravated  and  .result, in  discour^g- 

[3]  '^  V  ' 


ing  agriculture,  reducing  production,  depressing  the  value  of 
farm  land,  and  in  increasing  the  cost  while  lowering  the 
standard  of  living; 

''Resolved  (if  the  Assembly  concur),  That  a  joint  legisla- 
tive committee  be  and  the  same  is  hereby  constituted  to  consist 
of  four  Senators  and  five  members  of  the  Assembly  to  inquire 
into  such  conditions; 

"  Resolved,  That  such  committee  be  hereby  authorized  to  sit 
anywhere  within  the  State,  to  choose  a  chairman  from  among 
its  own  members,  and  employ  a  secretary,  counsel,  and  such 
other  assistants  as  may  be  needed,  to  take  testimony,  subpoena 
witnesses  and  compel  production  of  books,  documents  and 
papers,  and  otherwise  have  all  the  powers  of  a  legislative 
committee ; 

"  Resolved,  That  such  committee,  on  or  before  February 
1st,  1917,  report  the  results  of  its  inquiries  to  the  Legislature, 
together  with  such  proposed  legislative  measures  as  it  deems 
advisable  to  carry  its  recommendations  into  effect ; 

"  Resolved,  That  the  expenses  of  such  committee,  not 
exceeding  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  ($25,000),  be  payable 
from  the  contingent  fund  of  the  Legislature." 

The  records  of  the  -Senate  and  Assembly  show  that  said  resolu- 
tion was  adopted  by  both  houses  of  the  State  Legislature. 

Pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  the  said  concurrent  resolution,  the 
temporary  president  of  the  Senate  appointed  as  members  of  said 
committee  on  the  part  of  the  Senate  the  following  Senators : 

Senator  Charles  W.  Wicks ; 
Senator  !N".  Monroe  Marshall ; 
Senator  Morris  S.  Llalliday ; 
Senator  Daniel  J.  Carroll. 

The  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  pursuant  to  the  joint  resolution, 
appointed  as  members  of  said  committee: 

Assemblyman  H.  Edmund  Machold ; 
Assemblyman  Walter  W.  Law,  Jr.; 
Assemblyman  Henry  L.  Grant: 
Assemblyman  "Daniel  P.  Witter: 
Asseniblyman  Frank  J.  Taylor. 


The  authority  conferred  on  this  Committee  by  the  Legislature 
and  the  requirements  of  the  resolution  as  to  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee appear  at  length  in  the  foregoing  concurrent  resolution. 

ORGANIZATION  OF  COMMITTEE 

The  Committee  organized  on  the  15th  day  of  June,  1916,  by 
electing  Hon.  Charles  W.  Wicks,  chairman,  and  Hon.  H.  Edmund 
Machold,  vice-chairman,  and  Hon.  Walter  W.  Law,  Jr.,  as  secre- 
tary. The  Committee  appointed  Mr.  George  W.  Ward  as  counsel, 
with  Mr.  James  C.  Bronner  as  his  assistant. 

As  it  was  evident  that  the  investigations  of  the  Committee  would 
require  the  services  of  a  competent  expert  accountant  or  account- 
ants, the  Committee,  after  consultation  with  the  experts  of  the 
Dairy  Division  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
and  other  public  bodies  and  officials  in  touch  with  the  subjects  in 
the  hands  of  the  Committee,  employed  Mr.  Herbert  B.  Hawkins,  a 
certified  public  accountant,  of  198  Broadway,  New  York,  to  make 
as  full  and  complete  an  audit  of  the  records  and  accounts  of  typical 
milk  distributing  companies  as  the  time  and  funds  of  the  Com- 
mittee permitted. 

Certain  companies  were  selected  by  the  Committee  after  a  care- 
ful examination  of  the  field  as  being  representative  of  the  various 
types  of  companies  engaged  in  the  business.  In  addition  to  the  com- 
plete audits  of  these  selected  companies  for  the  year  in  question, 
examination  was  made  into)  various  phases  of  the  work  of  other 
companies  to  the  end  that  the  Committee  might  be  generally 
familiar  with  costs  of  distribution,  important  factors  of  costs, 
capitalization,  profits,  and  modes  of  operation.  The  Committee 
found  that  on  October  9,  1914,  a  proceeding  had  been  instituted  in 
the  'Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  New  York  upon  the  petition  of 
James  A.  Parsons,  Attorney-General,  pursuant  to  chapter  25  of 
the  Laws  of  1909,  as.  amended,  constituting  chapter  25  of  the 
Consolidated  Laws,  for  an  inquiry  into  the  practices  of  the  so- 
called  Butter  and  Egg  Exchange  in  the  City  of  New  York;  that 
said  inquiry  had  been  pursued  by  the  Attorney-General's  office  of 
the  State  and  evidence  taken  during  the  years  1914  and  1915,  and 
until  December  17,  1915,  which  was  followed  by  a  report  of  the 
referee,  Hon.  Edward  R,  O'Malluy,  to  Hon.  Egburt  E.  Woodbury, 


6 

Attorney-General,  shortly  prior  to  the  commencement  of  the  work 
of  this  Committee.  The  Attorney-General's  office  had  employed  in 
this  work,  in  addition  to  its  other  agencies,  the  firm  of  M.  &  L.  W. 
Scudder,  certified  puhlic  accountants,  of  55  Wall  street.  This 
firm  had  made  an  exhaustive  investigation  into  the  accounts  and 
records  and  husiness  methods  of  the  members  of  the  so-called 
Butter  and  Egg  Exchange  and  complete  reports  of  this  work  were 
on  file  in  the  Attorney-General's  office.  After  consultation  with 
the  Attorney-General,  all  the  evidence  and  records  of  this  investiga- 
tion and  the  reports  of  the  accountants  employed  by  the  Attorney- 
GeneraPs  Department  were  placed  at  the  disposal  of  this  Com- 
mittee and  the  Committee  had  the  full  advantage  thereof.  As  these 
reports  were  exhaustive  and  complete  and  had  been  procured  at  a 
large  expense  to  the  State,  the  Committee  has  availed  itself  thereof, 
thereby  saving  the  cost  of  an  independent  investigation  and 
accounting. 

At  the  request  of  the  Committee,  the  firm  of  M .  &  L.  W.  Scudder, 
the  accountants  employed  by  the  Attorney-General,  for  a  small 
retainer  agreed  to  and  did  bring  their  investigations  down  to 
December  1st,  1916,  with  a  supplementary  report  and  placed  them- 
selves and  their  firm  at  the  service  of  the  Committee  as  a  public 
service.  Therefore,  the  Committee  has  not  only  had  the  use  and 
benefit  of  the  Scudder  audits  of  the  Butter  and  Egg  Exchange  and 
the  commission  men  and  produce  dealers  connected  therewith,  but 
have  had  the  aid  and  assistance  of  Messrs.  M.  £  L.  W.  Scudder  in 
explanation  thereof,  wrhen  required.  This  statement  is  made  in 
acknowledgment  of  the  cordial  co-operation  received  by  the  Com- 
mittee from  the  said  firm  of  M.  &  L.  W.  Scudder,  certified  public 
accountants. 

IMPORTANCE  or  THE  QUESTIONS  INVOLVED 

We  believe  it  is  the  first  time  that  a  legislative  committee  has 
been  constituted  with  authority  and  power  to  investigate  fully  into 
the  conditions  surrounding  the  production  and  distribution  of 
agricultural  products  in  this  State.  We  have  not  been  able  to 
learn  that  any  other  State  bodies  or  legislative  agencies  have 
attempted  a  similar  investigation.  Various  municipal  inquiries 
have  been  had  on  some  of  the  questions  involved  and  various  phases 


of  these  matters  have  been  looked  into  from  time  to  time  by  State 
agencies  or  public  bodies  but  lacking  the  authority  and  equipment 
to  make  complete  investigation  of  the  subject  or  to  bring  together 
all  the  related  matters  in  a  comprehensive  survey. 

Into  the  work  of  such  a  survey  the  Committee  has  entered  and 
has  proceeded  as  far  therein  as  the  period  that  has  elapsed  from 
the  date  when  its  funds  became  available  until  the  date  of  this 
report  has  permitted.  It  has  not  been  able  in  that  time  to  cover 
the  entire  field ;  in  fact,  it  has  only  been  able  to  cover  a  small 
part  of  it. 

APPOINTED  HEARINGS  OF  JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE 

The  Joint  Legislative  Committee,  with  a  quorum  present,  held 
sessions  for  the  taking  of  testimony  at  the  following  dates  and 

places: 

June  27,  1916.     Chamber  of  Commerce  Rooms,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

July  0-7.     New  York  State  Agricultural  College,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

July;  10.     Court  House,  Cortland,  N.  Y. 

July  11.     Court  House,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 

July  12.     Court  House,  Owego,  N.  Y. 

July  13.     City  Hall,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 

July  14.     Court  House,  Norwich,  N.  Y. 

July  18-20.     New  York  State  Agricultural  College,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

July  25.-   Senate  Judiciary  Room,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

July  20.     High  School  Building,  Cobleskill,  N.  Y. 

July  27.     Court  House,  Delhi,  N.  Y. 

July  31.     City  Hall,  Watertown,  N.  Y. 

August     1.     Town  Hall,  Antwerp,  N.  Y. 

August     2.     New  York  State  Agricultural  School,  Canton,  N.  Y. 

August     3.     Town  Hall,  Massena,  N.  Y. 

August     4.     Court  House,  Malone,  N.  Y. 

August     7.     Chamber  of  Commerce  Rooms,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

August     8.     Court  House,  Rome,  N.  Y. 

August     9.     City  Hall,  Oneida,  N.  Y. 

August  10.     Court  House,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

August  11.     Court  House,  Oswego,  N.  Y. 

August  21.     Chamber  of  Commerce  Rooms,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

August  25.     City  Hall,  New  York. 

August  29-30.     Court  House,  Cooperstown,  N.  Y. 

August  31.     Assembly  Room,  Hotel  Bloomfield,  Richfield  Springs,  N.  Y. 

September     1.     Town  Hall,  Clinton,  N.  Y. 

September     5.     Court  House,  Auburn,  N.  Y. 

September     6.     New  York  State  Experiment  Station,  Geneva,  N.  Y. 

September  7-8.     Court  House,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 


8 

September  25.     Hotel  Utica,  Utica,  N.  Y. 

September  26-28.     City  Hall,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

September  29.     City  Hall,  Lockport,  N.  Y. 

September  30.     Court  House,  Jamestown,  N.  Y. 

October     2.     City  Hall,  Clean,  N.  Y. 

October     3.     Court  House,  Belmont,  N.  Y. 

October     4.     Court  House,  Hornell,  X.  Y. 

October     5.     Court  House,  Warsaw,  N.  Y. 

October     6.     Court  House,  Geroeseo,  N.  Y. 

October  10.     Court  House,  Lowville,  N.  Y. 

October  11.     Village  Hall,  Boonville,  N.  Y. 

October  12.     Court  House,  Herkimer,  N.  Y. 

October  13.     Court  House,  Fonda,  X.  Y. 

November  14.     Court  House,  Kingston,  N.  Y. 

November)  15.     Court  House,  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y. 

November  16.     Court  House,  Middletown,  N.  Y. 

November  21,  November  22,  November  23,  November  24,  November  27,  Novem- 
ber 28,  November  29,  December  4,  December  5,  December  6,  December  7. 
December  8,  December  9,  December  11,  December  12,  December  13,  Decem- 
ber 14,  December  15,  December  16,  December  18.  Assembly  Rooms  of  the 
Merchant's  Association  of  the  City  of  New  York  in  the  Woolworth  Build- 
ing. 

December  19-21.     Committee  Room  in  the  Murray  Hill  Hotel,  New  York  City. 

AID  AND  ASSISTANCE  RENDERED  THE  COMMITTEE 

The  Committee  early  appealed  for  aid  and  assistance  in  this 
work  to  various  public  agencies  in  the  State  concerned  therewith. 
It  desires  at  this  time  to  acknowledge  the  co-operation,  advice  and 
aid  extended  to  it  by  the  New  York  State  College  of  Agriculture 
at  Cornell  University;  the  State  Experiment  Station  at  Geneva; 
the  New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  in  connection  with 
St.  Lawrence  University;  the  Department  of  Agriculture  of  the 
State  of  New  York;  the  Board  of  Health  of  the  City  of  Xew 
York ;  through  the  teachers  and  experts  connected  with  the  work 
of  those  institutions,  all  of  whom  when  called  upon  have  cheerfully 
given  their  time  and  labor  and  the  full  benefit  of  their  knowledge 
and  experience  to  the  work  of  the  Committee.  In  connection  with 
the  recording,  collecting  and  tabulating  the  cost  of  milk  production, 
it  has  received  extremely  valuable  aid  and  assistance  from  the 
various  Farm  Bureau  agents  employed  throughout  the  State.  At 
the  stated  hearings  enumerated,  there  appeared  in  the  agricultural 
counties  large  numbers  of  farmers  engaged  in  the  production  of 
dairy  products,  live-stock  and  poultry.  The  number  in  attendance 


\l  FRANK  J.  TAYLOR  \l 


9 

varied  from  twenty-five  to  three  hundred.  These  men  were  the 
actual  producers  and  gladly  took  a  part  in  the  work  of  the  Commit- 
tee and  fully  and  fairly  placed  at  its  disposal  their  experience  and 
the  conditions  under  which  they  work. 

LIVE-STOCK 

Because  more  pressing  problems  presented  themselves  to  the 
Committee  and  fully  occupied  the  time  allowed  it,  the  Committee 
has  not  entered  upon  a  survey  of  those  branches  of  the  live-stock 
industry  which  pertain  to  the  breeding,  rearing  and  sale  of  beef 
cattle,  horses  or  hogs.  The  question  of  sheep  raising  in  this  State 
and  the  production  of  lambs,  mutton  and  wool,  was  one  in  which 
the  farmers  coming  before  the  Committee  were  greatly  interested, 
and  this  matter  was  forced  upon  the  attention  of  the  Committee 
at  an  early  date,  although  the  more  pressing  problems  of  the  milk 
situation  has  prevented  the  Committee  from  giving  to  this  subject 
the  time  and  the  attention  it,  demands.  Nevertheless,  the  Commit- 
tee is  convinced  that  the  problem  is  an  important  and  pressing  one 
which  demands  remedial  legislation  at  this  session  of  the  State 
Legislature.  It  may  well  be  said  that  there  is  no  sheep  industry 
in  the  State  of  New  York  at  the  present  time.  In  view  of  the 
agricultural  history  of  this  State,  this  is  an  unpleasant  admission 
to  make  and  a  condition  which  must  necessarily  be  regretted  by  all 
the  people  of  this  State.  This  situation  explains  in  part  the  high 
cost  of  living,  of  which  our  people  are  bitterly  complaining.  It 
explains  in  part  the  shortage  and  consequent  high  price  of  neces- 
sary and  valuable  meat  foods  and  fabrics.  The  problem  is  not  one 
peculiar  to  the  State  of  New  York,  but  to  the  United  States  as 
a  whole.  Reliable  figures  are  presented  to  this  Committee  which 
show  that  between  the  years  1909  and  1915  the  production  of  wool 
in  the  United  States  fell  from  328,000,000  pounds  to  288,000,000 
pounds  —  a  loss  of  twelve  per  cent,  in  seven  years.  This  result 
was  brought  about  in  the  face  of  a  rapidly  increasing  population 
and  a  constant  increased  demand  both  for  food  stuffs  and  fabric 
material.  In  the  last  fiscal  year,  out  of  a  total  of  591,015,495 
pounds  of  wool  available  for  consumption  in  the  United  States, 
iy  300,000,000  pounds  were  necessarily  imported.  These 


10 

statistics  show  likewise  that  the  world  supply  of  wool  decreased 
as  follows,  viz. : 

1912 2,971,000,000  pounds 

1913 2,888,000,000  pounds 

1914 2,872,000,000  pounds 

1915 2,836,000,000  pounds 

The  decreasing  supply  of  meat  stuffs  supplied  by  the  sheep 
industry  and  the  consequent  high  prices  is  too  well  known 
and  appreciated  by  everyone  to  need  statistics  to  impress  upon  us 
the  necessity  of  taking  such  steps  as  will,  if  possible,  restore  this 
industry  to  the  State  of  New  York.  In  the  United  States,  the 
figures  show  that  the  number  of  sheep  decreased  in  the  last  six 
years  by  3,500,000 ;  in  the  last  year  by  765,000.  Reliable  figures 
are  presented  to  the  Committee  which  show  that  there  are  upwards 
of  five  million  acres  of  land  within  the  boundaries  of  the  State  of 
New  York  adapted  to  the  raising  of  sheep.  If  the  industry  can 
be  protected  and  made  to  flourish,  this  land  should  sustain  in  the 
neighborhood  of  ten  millions  of  sheep,  producing  in  value  in  food 
stuffs  and  wool  annually  a  sum  approximating  one  hundred 
millions  of  dollars.  Nevertheless,  the  history  of  this  industry 
shows  in  a  clear  and  remarkable  manner  how  easily  a  great  agri- 
cultural industry  and  one  of  vital  importance  in  furnishing  food 
and  clothing  to  the  population  may  be  lost.  The  federal  census  of 
1850  showed  in  the  State  of  New  York  3,453,241  mature  sheep  - 
the  second  largest  number  of  any  state  in  the  Union.  The  agri- 
cultural interests  of  our  State  for  1867  stated  the  number  of  sheep 
in  the  State  to  amount  to  5,350,000.  In  1916,  the  enumeration 
only  finds  in  this  State  of  New  York  the  following: 

In  New  York  State 

Sheep  one  year  old  and  over 350,088 

Lambs  under  one  year 144,971 


Total.  .  495,059 


Decrease 4,854,941 


11 

Thus  it  conclusively  appears  that  the  sheep  industry  has 
departed  from  the  State  of  New  York  during  comparatively  recent 
3rears.  Various  explanations  may  be  advanced  for  this  result.  It 
is  probably  true,  as  numbers  claim,  that  during  the  years  from 
1880  to  1900,  the  prices  paid  to  producers  for  lamb,  mutton  and 
wool  were  not  sufficient  to  yield  a  fair  labor  and  capital  return, 
and  that  producers  abandoned  the  industry  largely  for  that  reason, 
but  for  several  years  past  that  reason  no  longer  prevailed  and  one 
might  naturally  expect  that  the  past  five  years  would  have  shown 
a  steady  increase.  We  believe  the  contrary  to  be  the  case.  It  is 
very  probable  that  the  art  of  sheep  husbandry  has  been  largely  lost 
to  the  State  with  the  loss  of  the  industry  itself,  and  that  this  art 
must  be  again  made  common  knowledge  in  our  agricultural  com- 
munities if  the  industry  is  to  be  restored.  Notwithstanding  these 
problems,  it  nevertheless  is  undisputed  that  for  many  years  prior 
to  the  practical  disappearance  of  the  industry  from  the  State,  an 
unnecessary  burden  was  imposed  upon  it  by  the  depredation  of 
dogs,  and  those  interested  citizens  who  are  attempting  as  indi- 
viduals to  re-engage  in  this  industry  and  bring  it  back  to  the  State 
declare,  in  all  sections  of  the  State,  that  their  aims  cannot  be 
accomplished  unless  the  State  provides  such  laws  as  will  secure 
their  flocks  from  destruction  by  the  army  of  stray  and  worthless 
dogs  that  infest  the  various  communities.  They  state  a  proposition, 
with  which  this  Committee  is  constrained  to  agree,  that  if  the 
State  of  JSTew  York  can  protect  the  red  deer  in  the  forest  from  the 
ravages  of  dogs,  it  is  equally  able  to  protect  its  flocks  of  sheep 
from  destruction  by  these  animals.  We  believe  it  will  be 
impossible  to  interest  the  people  of  this  State  in  restoring  sheep 
husbandry  and  in  the  building  up  through  several  years  of  fine 
flocks  of  sheep  unless  they  are  assured  that  the  flocks  will  not  be 
destroyed  by  dogs,  as  in  the  past.  We  desire  particularly  to 
impress  the  point  that  compensation  by  the  State  or  town  for  a 
destroyed  flock  is  of  no  benefit  at  all  to  the  industry  as  a  Avhole. 
It  places  a  bounty  on  destruction.  For  instance,  Farmer  A.  pur- 
chases some  expensive  and  fine  bred  animals,  from  which  to  build 
up  a  flock  of  sheep  for  his  farm.  If  he  does  not  himself  remember 
the  art,  he  procures  from  Canada  or  elsewhere  a  competent  shep- 
herd and  one  versed  in  the  care  and  management  of  these  animals. 


12 

Presently  the  stray  curs  of  the  neighborhood  ravage  the  flock. 
Some  of  the  finest  animals  are  destroyed,  the  whole  nock 
frightened,  demoralized  and  seriously  injured.  He  receives  com- 
pensation, in  part  or  in  whole,  and  tries  again  to  huild  up  on  the 
remnant.  Presently  the  flock  is  raided  again  with  the  former 
result  and  practically  or  entirely  destroyed.  Again  compensation 
is  made  and  the  farmer  disgusted  and  discouraged  turns  the  rem- 
nant, if  any,  over  to  the  butcher  and  abandons  the  business.  So 
we  have  the  situation,  instead  of  this  group  of  fine-blooded  animals 
furnishing  a  center  for  the  spread  of  the  art  and  industry  in  the 
neighborhood,  it  is  snuffed  out  by  the  dogs  with  the  co-operation  of 
the  State.  The  State  loses  both  the  money  and  the  sheep.  The 
Committee  has  heard  this  story  time  and  again  during  its  sessions 
from  deeply  earnest  and  interested  men.  It  appears  to  this  Com- 
mittee far  more  preferable  to  eliminate  from  this  State  all  its 
canine  population  than  to  permit  these  animals  to  be  a  burden 
upon  the  men  who  desire  to  re-engage  in  sheep  husbandry  and 
possibly  to  prevent  the  restoration  of  this  art  and  industry  so 
important  to  the  welfare  of  this  State.  We  add  some  extracts  of 
testimony  presented  to  us  covering  these  matters. 

FLOYD  COKTWRIGHT,  of  North  Chemung,  called  as  a  witness 
before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"'*'  There  is  a,  great  drawback  through  the  country  with  people 
raising  sheep.  They  get  chewed  up  so  much  with  dogs.  They 
don't  get  their  pay  for  a  great  many  and  don't  keep  sheep  on  that 
account.  The  liability  to  attack  by  dogs  is  an  actual  peril  to  the 
sheep  raising  business.  I  have  not  myself  encountered  serious  loss, 
but  on  many  occasions  my  neighbors  have.  There  isn't  so  many 
flocks  of  sheep  in  Chemung  county  as  there  was  twenty  years  ago — 
probably  isn't  more  than  one-quarter  the  number  of  flocks.  In  a 
radius  of  six  miles  from  my  place  there  may  be  twenty  flocks  at 
this  time,  ranging  from  ten  to  fifty.  Twenty  years  ago,  in  the 
same  territory,  there  were  eighty  flocks  at  least.  We  are  engaged 
in  the  production  of  wool  and  lambs  and  mutton.  We  do  find 
trouble  here  in  hiring  competent  persons  and  men  who  understand 
sheep  husbandry.  If  I  increased  the  flock  that  would  be  a  great 
trouble  to  me.  I  think  they  are  about  the  best  paying  stock  there 


13 

is  at  the  present  time.  It  pays  much  better  than  dairying.  I  have 
about  fifty  sheep.  My  gross  income  from  this  flock  in  1915  was 
around  $400.  That  would  be  about  $8  per  head  gross  income  from 
wool  and  lambs.  I  raise  the  grain  for  the  sheep  on  the  farm.  I 
had  to  buy  grain  for  the  cattle.  I  only  fed  them  a  small  amount 
of  oats  during  March  and  April.  That  was  to  the  ewes  to  make 
them  strong  for  the  lambing  time.  They  do  not  require  a  large 
grain  consumption.  In  1915,  I  got  29^  cents  a  pound  for  the  raw 
wool  just  sheared  off  for  the  year.  This  year,  it  is  40  cents.  Back 
in  1912  or  1913,  it  was  about  23  or  24  cents.  At  23  and  24  cents 
there  was  a  profit  in  the  sheep  more  than  in  dairying.  This  flock 
of  fifty  sheep  would  not  require  over  thirty  days  of  labor  of  one 
man  for  the  herding,  shearing,  washing  and  caring  and  feeding 
the  sheep  through  the  year.  That  would  not  include  the  first 
fencing.  You  cannot  make  a  dog  tight  fence.  The  effect  of 
pasturing  the  sheep  for  a  series  of  years  is  to  improve  the  land. 
Of  course,  the  dairy  cows  cannot  feed  after  the  sheep.  I  think  if 
this  dog  matter  were  taken  care  of  in  a  way  that  people  would  feel 
that  the  sheep  wouldn't  be  eaten  up  with  dogs  that  many  more 
people  would  go  into  the  s-heep  business.  More  people  would  keep 
sheep  out  in  these  hill  regions.  I  have  known  many  instances  of 
attacks  where  the  damage  amounted,  as  allowed  by  the  fence 
viewers,  to  $120,  some  of  $80.  The  dogs  kill  a  number  of  sheep 
in  one  night.  I  have  known  as  high  as  twenty  sheep  from  one 
flock  being  killed.  It  ruins  the  rest  of  the  flock  also.  A  herd  of 
sheep  once  chased  by  dogs  is  never  worth  much.  I  keep  graded 
Shropshire.-*  largely  with  a  pure  bred  ram.  I  usually  average  about 
a  lamb  and  a  quarter  per  ewe ;  that  is,  I  would  have  something  over 
sixty  lambs  from  my  flock  of  about  fifty  ewes.  I  cut  about  six 
pounds  of  wool  from  each  sheep.  You  can  keep  about  seven  sheep, 
I  figure,  at  the  same  cost  for  food  and  labor  as  one  dairy  cow. 
They  use  largely  coarse  fodder,  hay  or  ensilage.  The  dogs  just 
kill  them,  let  them  lay  and  they  will  go  back  and  feed  on  them 
later.  They  are  mostly  dogs  that  are  kept  by  people  who  really 
are  not  able  to  take  care  of  them  and  those  dogs  forage  a  good  deal 
and  work  into  the  sheep  that  way.  A  good  dairy  dog  will  seldom 
take  a  run  out  of  the  sheep." 


14 

Lucius  E.  WICKS,  of  Owego,  X.  Y.,  called  as  a  witness  before 
the  Committee,  testified : 

"  The  town  of  Owego  has  paid  for  several  herds  of  sheep 
destroyed  by  dogs  during  the  past  year.  Since  the  15th  day  of 
November,  1915,  we  paid  out  $387  to  the  owners  for  sheep  killed 
by  dogs  on  the  fence  viewers  appraisal  of  the  damage  done.  The 
damage  done  by  dogs  has  materially  interfered  with  the  sheep 
industry  in  this  section.  A  great  many  more  farmers  would  keep 
sheep  if  it  were  not  for  the  fear  of  the  dogs  getting  into  them  and 
destroying  their  herds.  In  the  year  1914,  we  paid  out  $138.08  for 
sheep  killed  by  dogs.  In  1915  we  paid  out  $250.10  for  sheep 
killed  by  dogs.  From  November,  1915,  up  to  May  20th  we  paid 
out  $387.  We  have  in  this  town  a  dog  tax,  $1  for  a  dog,  $2  for 
every  additional  one,  and  $4  for  a  bitch,  but  we  are  not  able  to 
collect  the  tax.  They  don't  collect  the  dog  tax.  The  dog  proposi- 
tion is  a  bad  one  in  the  sheep  business.  The  dog  tax  in  our  town 
did  not  equal  the  amount  of  money  paid  out  and  it  had  to  be  taken 
out  of  the  general  town  fund.  We  did  not  collect  more  than  $200." 

HANSOM  L.  LEONARD,  of  Owego,  *N.  Y.,  called  as  a  witness 
before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  have  a  farm  of  160  acres  and  keep  a  dairy  of  22  cows  and 
50  or  60  sheep.  We  rent  a  good  dairy  pasture  which  allows  us  to 
carry  so  much  stock.  I  have  kept  sheep  for  thirty  years.  The 
keeping  of  sheep  on  these  cheap  lands  is  a  good  proposition  for  the 
farmer  if  you  can  keep  the  dogs  away  from  them.  During  the  last 
two  years,  we  have  had  serious  losses.  Previous  to  that,  we  ran 
along  quite  a  number  of  years  without  much  loss  —  just  two  or 
three,  or  something  like  that  killed  annually.  But  two  years  ago 
after  we  turned  our  ram  in  the  dogs  got  at  them  the  very  first  night 
and  they  killed  thirteen  outright  and  they  chased  those  sheep  over 
that  pasture,  and  if  you  know  what  that  means  to  give  the  herds  a 
night's  run,  which  we  found  they  did,  you  know  something  about 
the  damage.  How  many  were  lost  indirectly,  I  don't  know.,  but 
during  the  winter  I  should  say  six  or  eight  or  nine  head  more  as 
a  result  of  this  night's  chasing.  We  endeavor  to  take  good  care 
of  them  and  not  lose  them.  We  have  been  at  it  long  enough  so 


15 

that  we  think  we  know  how  to  handle  sheep  and  if  they  are  not 
dogged  and  chased  and  bit  and  run,  we  feel  pretty  safe,  but  when 
you  get  a  mess  of  dogs  in  a  lot  it  is  something  beyond  me  to  pick 
out  the  sheep  that  are  going  to  winter  through.  Last  fall,  a  year 
ago,  we  had  one  two-year-old  ewe  that  had  a  front  leg  gnawed  off. 
One  got  well  and  was  sold  for  market.  Others  that  were  chased 
and  bit  the  least  bit,  some  in  the  neck  that  you  could  hardly  detect, 
didn't  amount  to  anything.  I  consider  that  the  frightening  of 
the  sheep  when  chased  by  dogs  is  practically  ruinous  to  the  flock. 
The  fence  viewers  allowed  us  $50  for  that  a  year  ago  last  fall. 
Our  damage  was  at  least  $150.  Our  sheep  were  not  fulljbloods, 
but  we  tried  to  get  ewes  that  will  raise  a  lamb  and  a  half  or  better 
and  eight  pounds  of  wool.  That  is  the  goal  we  work  toward. 
When  we  get  a  flock  of  sheep  that  the  dogs  are  kept  away  from, 
we  can  do  that,  but  we  cannot  do  it  unless  we  give  them  good  care. 
We  do  keep  a  pure-bred  ram.  Our  buck  we  paid  $25  for  and  the 
best  sire  I  ever  saw,  not  the  best  sheep,  but  the  best  sire.  He  is 
alive  yet,  but  he  isn't  worth  a  dollar  because  four  or  five  days  after 
he  had  been  turned  into  the  flock  in  a  new  pasture,  the  dogs  ran 
them  a  second  time.  We  went  over  to  the  pasture  on  Monday 
morning  and  found  seven  dead  ones.  Three  of  the  ewes  were  lost 
out  of  the  pasture  and  we  did  not  find  them  for  a  week.  They 
were  lame  and  gaunt  but  not  bit.  The  whole  herd  were  worried 
and  run  and  chased.  As  I  say,  we  were  allowed  $50  for  that  job 
and  we  haven't  got  our  money  yet.  I  have  been  so  disgusted  with 
it  that  I  have  never  asked  for  it.  This  chasing  damage  last  year 
was  the  worst  we  ever  had.  If  we  could  rent  pastures  that  are 
lying  idle  and  you  would  keep  the  dogs  away  from  our  sheep,  we 
would  have  fine  flocks,  but  we  cannot  raise  sheep  with  these  dogs 
running  loose  and  I  don't  know  just  what  we  are  going  to  do 
with  our  hill  farms.  We  have  bells  on  about  half  the  sheep.  A 
neighbor  went  down  to  the  pasture  the  other  day,  went  down  into 
a  ravine  and  in  a  few  minutes  along  came  a  hound  and  two  shep- 
herds, looking  first  one  way  and  then  the  other.  They  didn't 
happen  to  do  any  damage,  but  went  about  their  business.  They 
generally  work  in  pairs  or  threes.  I  know  if  I  have  a  sheep  that 
gets  out  of  the  pasture  and  goes  over  on  my  neighbor's  line,  he 
notifies  me  and  I  must  go  and  get  it  and  if  I  don't  he  either  sues 


16 

me  and  I  have  to  settle,  but  the  dogs  go  right  through  our  pa.- 
and  we  cannot  stop  it;  there  are  no  marks  on  them  to  control  t; 
and  it  is  their  nature  to  chase  sheep.     Wool  at  25  cents  a  pound 
is  a  good  business,  in  mj  opinion.     It  was  a  good  business  even 
when  wool  was  below  25  cents  a  pound." 

CHARLES  W.  LARMON,  connected  with  the  Agriculture  DeJ>krt> 
ment  of  the  State  of  ISTew  York,  called  before  the  Com- 
mitte  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  We  had  a  question  sent  out  to  all  the  Farm  Bureau  agi 
With  few  exceptions  the  answers  were  something  like  this: 
think  that  the  dog  problem  keeps  a  great  many  farmers  out  of  the 
sheep  business  and  the  reason  is  that  most  of  the  flocks  suffer  seri- 
ous damage  from  time  to  time/  or  '  many  farmers  would  keep 
sheep  or  add  sheep  to  their  business  if  it  were  not  for  dogs.'  Onr 
records  show  that  a  town  in  Washington  county  paid  for  damage 
in  1912,  $762;  1913,  $391;  1914,  $148;  1915,  $208;  the  last  two 
years  being  under  the  Registration  Law,  when  the  dogs  that  did  this 
damage  were  traced  to  other  towns.  There  is  the  difficulty  of 
making  the  town  the  unit.  During  the  last  two  years  mentioned, 
this  town  had  a  dog  registration  law,  but  the  supervisor  who  was 
responsible  for  that  law  was  defeated,  '  it  was  said  by  people  who 
lived  in  the  back  districts  and  not  interested  in  the  sheep  industry, 
but  owned  dogs.7  Of  course,  an  increased  tax  does  not  keep  the 
dogs  from  killing  the  sheep,  but  it  tends  to  reduce  the  number  of 
dogs  and  a  man  who  keeps  three  or  four,  if  he  is  obliged  to  pay 
a  high  tax  on  them,  will  get  rid  of  the  dogs.  In  my  opinion,  it  is 
not  effective  to  make  the  town  the  unit  as  has  been  shown ;  the 
dogs  will  invade  the  flocks  from  other  towns.  The  State  should 
be  the  unit.  We  had  a  bill  last  year  which  proposed  to  make  the 
owner  responsible  for  all  damage  done  to  domestic  stock  by  a  dog. 
to  giATe  the  owner  the  privilege  of  destroying  any  dogs  seen  harass- 
ing his  flock  or  any  live-stock,  whether  licensed  or  unlicensed.  The 
people  interested  in  the  development  of  the  sheep  industry  in  the 
State  say  to  us  that  the  only  effective  remedy  will  be  to  require 
the  owner  of  dogs  to  keep  them  secured  or  shut  up  during  the 
night,  just  as  they  would  other  live-stock  during  those  hours  when 
great  danger  and  damages  were  done." 


17 

Professor  HENRY  M.  WING,  of  the  New  York  State  Agri- 
cultural College,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  The  most  obvious  fact  with  respect  to  the  sheep .  industry  is 
that  it  is  greatly  on  the  wane  in  the  State  of  New  York.  There 
were  in  round  numbers  1,750,000  sheep  in  the  State  of  New  York 
in  1900.  This  had  been  reduced  to  930,000  in  1910.  These  are 
the  census  figures.  It  is  obvious  that  there  must  be  some  reason 
for  that.  Various  reasons  are  assigned  and  you  ask  a  general 
farming  community  about  it  and  almost  universally  they  will  say 
it  is  the  difficulty  from  dogs,  but  I  was  inclined  to  the  idea  that  the 
number  of  sheep  had  declined  simply  because  other  lines  of  agri- 
cultural industry  have  proven  more  profitable.  We  have  a  herd 
of  sheep  in  connection  with  the  Agricultural  college.  Up  to  two 
months  ago  I  could  have  said  that  we  had  not  been  troubled,  but 
we  have  had  dogs  in  the  sheep  in  the  last  two  months  —  the  first 
time  it  has  happened  since  I  have  had  charge  of  the  flock.  Our 
fences  are  rather  more  carefully  and  strongly  built  than  the 
average  farm  sheep  fence,  but  we  never  have  taken  precautions 
to  put  them  up  at  night.  The  dogs  in  the  last  two  months  have 
killed  nearly  twenty  —  eighteen,  I  think,  is  the  exact  number. 
They  have  been  in  the  herd  three  different  times.  If  I  were  an 
ordinary  farmer  developing  a  flock  of  sheep,  that  result  would  be 
rather  disastrous  to  my  hopes.  It  is  certainly  logical  if  the  State 
protects  the  deer  by  not  allowing  dogs  to  wander  at  large  in  the 
deer  forest  or  even  to  be  free  in  the  deer  forest,  that  they  ought 
to  exercise  equal  care  towards  the  sheep.  I  do  not  think  dogs  have 
any  practical  use  on  a  dairy  farm.  Good  dairying  does  not  require 
dairy  dogs.  The  dogs  almost  do  as  much  damage  to  the  dairy  as 
they  do  the  the  sheep.  Flocks  of  sheep  that  have  once  been  chased 
by  dogs  are  not  likely  to  be  worth  much  afterwards.  It  practically 
ruins  the  flock,  especially  at  certain  periods." 

J.  F.  EASTMAN  ,  of  Binghamton,  Farm  Bureau  agent  for 
Broome  county,  called  as  a  witness  before  the  Committee, 
testified : 

k  There  is  in  this  county  considerable  hill  land.  It  is  rather 
low  in  price.  Some  would  not  bring  more  than  $5  an  acre.  I  think 
the  sheep  industry,  if  properly  protected,  would  have  a  profitable 


IS 

place  on  these  lands,  but  you  would  have  to  do  something  about 
the  dog  question.  That  is  the  drawback  that  has  driven  a  great 
many  sheep  men  out  of  business.  If  the  sheep  could  be  protected 
against  harrn  as  easily  as  the  cow  or  the  horse,  a  great  many 
more  sheep  would  be  kept  on  our  cheap  lands.  It  costs  a  man 
$100  to  have  a  dog  loose  in  the  Adirondack  forest  fifteen  minutes, 
but  he  can  have  a  dog  loose  on  a  sheep  farm  without  costing  him 
a  cent.  In  other  words,  we  protect  the  deer  better  from  being 
hounded  than  we  protect  the  sheep." 

CHARLES  STARK,  called  as  a  witness  before  the  Committee, 
testified : 

"  I  live  in  Pawling,  N.  Y.  The  farm  I  live  on  I  was  born  on 
and  worked  on  when  my  father  died.  He  supported  it;  gave  me 
half  and  my  son  half.  My  son  went  into  the  sheep  business  in  a 
small  way.  He  bought  about  twelve  or  fifteen  sheep  and  sold  the 
old  ones  and  kept  the  lambs  and  had  got  a  very  nice  flock  of  sheep, 
up  to  41  sheep.  He  had  a  thoroughbred  ram  we  got  from  Ward- 
ville  and  he  was  very  proud  of  his  sheep.  One  night  last  October 
he  had  41  and  in  the  morning  he  found  26  of  them  jammed  around 
the  barn  and  the  stock  pen,  tore  up  and  spoiled  and  gone,  and 
the  others  were  destroyed.  He  had  to  get  rid  of  them,  so  there  he 
was,  out  of  sheep  business  in  the  turning  over  of  your  hand.  No 
redress.  We  have  had  the  same  experience  with  a  neighbor,  only 
the  neighbor  is  still  in  the  business  as  he  had  about  25  of  his 
killed,  but  they  were  scattered  over  more  and  he  saved  a  good 
share  of  his  flock.  My  son  received  from  the  board  of  supervisors 
about  $6  apiece.  Even  though  he  received  the  full  amount  for 
the  sheep  killed,  it  wouldn't  cover  the  amount  of  loss,  as  it  put 
him  out  of  business  and  he  was  proud  of  his  sheep.  They  were 
doing  very  well,  and  with  him  it  was  chickens  and  sheep  and  not 
so  much  milk  business,  and  he  thought  he  had  solved  the  problem 
of  making  his  farm  a  success.  He  was  making  good  on  the 
chickens  and  on  the  sheep  and  it  was  pretty  hard  to  go  to  bed  at 
night  and  wake  up  in  the  morning  and  be  put  out  of  the  sheep 
business.  The  experience  we  have  had  is  that  it  is  very  seldom 
the  neighbor's  dogs.  They  have  a  tendency  to  go  a  long  distance 
from  home  to  kill  the  sheep ;  that  was  the  case  of  Neighbor  Hooker. 


19 

He  shot  one  of  the  dogs  and  did  not  kill  it  and  it  escaped  in  the 
brush  and  was  discovered  cutting  over  the  mountains  five  or  six 
miles  away.  They  could  not  follow  it  up.'7 

JOHN  MC^NAMAKA,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  live  in  the  town  of  Warren  in  Herkimer  county.  I  have 
stopped  making  winter  milk  and  am  going  to  make  summer  milk 
and  get  some  sheep.  The  only  trouble  is  the  dogs.  Within  six 
veeks  the  dogs  have  practically  destroyed  four  fine  flocks  in  our 
town.  Every  boy  has  got  a  hunt  dog  and  a  bird  dog  and  the 
mother  has  got  a  pet  dog.  I  believe,  with  Professor  Warren,  that 
a  good  dairy  dog  does  more  harm  to  a  dairy  than  a  bad  dog  does 
to  a  flock  of  sheep.  A  dog  ought  to  be  shown  no  favor  as  a  dairy 
proposition.  In  order  to  bring  back  the  sheep  industry  in  my 
locality,  there  has  got  to  be  some  law  framed  that  will  protect 
them.  I  have  got  a  pretty  good  account  and  have  figured  on 
getting  some  new  fencing  and  about  four  weeks  ago  I  drove  down 
into  the  town  of  Maryland  and  bought  22  sheep  at  $6.25,  and 
lambs  together.  I  bought  the  bunch  as  they  ran.  I  am  going  to 
learn  how  to  take  care  of  them." 

'  CLARK  ALLIS,  of  Medina,  Orleans  county,  testified : 

"  I  had  at  one  time  500  breeding  ewes,  but  attack  after  attack 
by  dogs,  both  worthless  curs  and  upper  crust  dogs,  have  cut  me 
down  to  under  200  ewes.  Some  years,  dogs  have  been  in  my  flock 
four  times,  and  I  am  behind  two  years  now  on  claims  against  the 
town,  and  there  is  no  money  to  pay  mine  or  other  claims.  The 
Wells  Brothers  near  me  were  in  the  spring  or  winter  lamb  busi- 
ness. A  couple  of  years  ago  the  dogs  got  into  the  flock  just  before 
the  ewes  were  put  into  the  barn  for  the  winter.  Most  of  the  lambs 
were  born  dead.  This  practically  ruined  their  valuable  flock  of 
sheep.  In  October,  1916,  my  sheep  were  lambing.  The  dogs 
killed  five  lambs  one  night.  Eleven  were  born  dead  within  a  few 
days  and  many  of  the  ewes  will  never  be  worth  anything  except 
for  what  wool  they  had.  I  have  had  sheep  bitten  by  a  dog  with 
rabies  and  had  the  sheep  go  mad.  I  have  had  as  high  as  32  killed 


20 

and  bitten  one  night.  My  best  friend  was  bitten  with  a  dog  with 
rabies.  I  have  been  bitten  four  times  by  worthless  curs.  T-ke 
town  of  Ridgway,  Orleans  county,  has  over  four  hundred  dogs  aud 
only  100  are  licensed.  The  dogs  are  mad ;  the  sheep  are  mad,  and 
Clark  Allis  is  the  maddest  one  in  the  whole  bunch.  In  1914  and 
1915,  the  town  of  Ridgway  had  over  $1,200  dog  damage  to  sheep. 
A  brindle  bull  dog  figured  in  every  deal  where  any  dogs  were 
seen,  but  no  one  could  kill  him  or  find  whose  dog  it  was  for 
months.  The  town  still  owes  me  for  that  year.  Is  it  right  or  ju.st. 
and  can  we  keep  sheep  in  New  York  under  this  situation  ?  " 

WINFIELD  S.  PECK,  of  North  Norwich,   Chenango  county, 
called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  had  a  herd  of  130  sheep  one  year,  but  the  dogs  chased  them 
and  our  own  dogs  would  go  out  and  kill  somebody  else's  and  we 
had  to  pay  them  and  finally  we  went  out  of  the  sheep  business 
and  went  into  the  dairy  business.  I  do  not  think  if  we  regulated 
the  keeping  of  dogs  it  would  bring  back  the  sheep  industry  to  this 
section,  as  it  requires  too  much  care  to  raise  lambs  and  wool  and 
keep  them  flourishing.  This  section  is  better  adapted  to  the  dairv 
interests.  That  is  what  we  want  to  follow." 

J.  Gr.  WARD,  of  Franklin,  Delaware  county,  called  as  a  wiv 
ness,  testified: 

"  There  are  very  few  sheep  in  our  county.  It  is  pretty  hard  to 
fence  against  them  and  the  dogs  bother  them.  If  the  dogs  did 
not  bother  them,  I  think  it  would  be  a  profitable  proposition." 

J.  P.  DOIG,  of  Meredith,  Delaware  county,  called  as  a  witness 
testified : 

"  I  always  kept  a  few  sheep  until  two  years  ago.  Then  my 
fences  could  not  hold  them.  They  were  wiser  than  I  was  and 
wandered  over  the  place.  I  got  more  clear  money  out  of  the  few 
sheep  I  had  than  anything  I  had  on  the  farm,  but  they  got  so  wise 
they  would  travel  over  the  whole  farm  at  night  and  be  back  in  the 


21 

lot  in  the  morning,  so  I  sold  them.  They  showed  an  average 
profit  better  than  dairying.  I  had  nothing  on  my  farm  that  I 
co«ld  get  more  clear  money  from  than  I  had  from  those  few 
sheep.  There  is  no  sheep  at  all  in  my  neighborhood  now." 

EMMETT  A.  COOK,  of  Hornellsville,  N.  Y.,  called  as  a  witness 
before  the  Committee,  testified: 

*''  I  have  31  sheep  at  the  present  time.  In  the  spring  I  had  57. 
The  dogs  got  in  them  in  the  spring  and  slaughtered  a  lot  of  them 
in  May.  I  don't  know  whose  dogs  they  were.  They  had  been  in 
my  flocks  once  before  about  four  years  ago  and  killed  about  30  or 
40  per  cent,  of  them  and  ruined  the  flock  then,  and  they  ruined 
the  flock  this  year.  I  put  in  a  claim  to  the  supervisors  and  got 
$10  a  head  for  breeding  ewes,  and  $8  for  rams,  by  way  of  damages. 
They  tore  up  seventeen  one  morning  about  six  o'clock ;  two  dogs,  I 
caught  them  at  it  but  could  not  identify  the  dogs.  The  ewes  were 
high  grade  Shropshires.  The  flock  is  ruined  for  a  year  or  two 
nearly.  Of  course,  they  allowed  us  something  for  that  damage; 
I  was  allowed  $308  for  the  17  ewes  and  the  lambs  and  damage 
to  the  flock.  I  had  a  registered  buck  that  was  killed.  I  don't 
know  of  any  dogs  in  Steuben  county  that  are  worth  anything. 
If  a  man  would  come  along  and  offer  to  buy  my  flock  at  the  same 
prices  allowed  me  for  damages  I  would  not  desire  to  sell.  I 
was  tempted  to  sell  them  all  out  for  a  short  time,  but  I  have 
gotten  a  little  more  grit  than  I  did  have  and  have  bought  a  few 
more  and  am  going  to  stick  to  it.  There  is  'better  money  in  sheep 
fanning  than  in  dairying  at  present  prices.  My  farm  is  a  sheep 
farm,  fenced  with  woven  wire  fences  that  cost  25  to  35  cents  a  rod 
for  the  wire.  I  had  my  own  posts.  A  dog  law  that  would  satisfy 
the  sheep  men  would  be  a  law  compelling  every  man  to  muzzle 
his  dog  and  know  where  he  is  at  all  times.  I  would  like  to  see  a 
law  that  prevented  dogs  from  running  at  large  unless  accompanied 
by  the  owner.  There  are  efforts  being  made  by  the  sheep  farmers 
but  they  don't  seem  to  go.  Sportsmen  can  get  everything  they 
want,  but  the  farmers  don't  get  anything  they  want,  Our  board 
of  supervisors  did  the  best  they  could  four  or  five  years  ago;  they 
passed  an  ordinance  that  they  should  register  the  dogs  and  pay 


22 

a  tax.  It  is  enforced  some.  The  city  dogs  are  the  ones  that  do 
the  trouble.  I  don't  think  it  is  the  dairy  dogs,  but  the  mongrels 
from  the  town.  If  the  law  were  enforced  by  State  authorities  it 
would  be  better.  There  are  only  one  or  two  other  flocks  in  our 
whole  town.  Ten  or  fifteen  years  ago1,  nearly  every  farmer  had  a 
small  flock,  but  they  were  driven  out  in  discouragement  by  the 
havoc  committed  by  the  dogs.  Two-thirds  of  our  town  is  better 
adapted  to  sheep  raising  than  anything  else.  Every  man,  or  nearly 
all  of  them,  would  be  in  the  sheep  business  to-day  if  it  were  not 
for  the  dogs.  A  law  that  gave  me  "the  right  to  shoot,  on  sight, 
every  dog  not  accompanied  by  its  owner  would  not  improve  my 
condition,  as  I  do  that  now.  If  we  had  a  State  constabulary  with 
a  provision  that  the  State  officer  should  execute  any  dog  wandering 
at  large  it  would  be  a  good  thing,  but  it  wouldn't  make  much  dif- 
ference up  our  way,  we  do  that  anyway,  but  that  is  not  the 
protection.  You  have  got  to  reach  into  those  towns  where  the 
dogs  come  from.  If  there  were  no  dogs  in  the  cities,  there  would 
not  be  much  harm  done.  We  place  them  in  the  city  nearly  every 
time  we  catch  them  at  it ;  bird  dogs  and  hounds  and  mongrels  of 
all  kinds;  there  doesn't  seem  to  be  much  difference  in  the  breed 
The  dogs  that  destroyed  my  flock  the  last  time  were  in  them  about 
an  hour,  as  near  as  I  can  learn.  A  neighbor  heard  them  and 
caught  them  at  it  and  notified  me.  They  just  kill  them  for  the 
love  of  killing;  tear  them  all  to  pieces.  I  say  that  the  vagrant 
dogs  have  driven  the  sheep  industry  practically  out  of  this  county. 
In  the  old  days  when  everybody  had  sheep  our  markets  were  full 
of  lamb  and  mutton  that  could  be  bought  very  reasonably,  but  it 
was  a  good  business  even  then.  It  was  a  good  deal  better  now,  but 
the  people  that  work  in  those  factories  in  Hornell  cannot  go  into 
the  market  and  find  plenty  of  mutton  and  lamb  there  throughout 
the  year  at  a  reasonable  price.  The  price  they  pay  now  is  very 
high,  so  that  those  city  dogs  cost  their  owners  good  hard  money 
every  year  in  the  consequent  high  price  of  lamb,  mutton  and 
clothing." 


£ 


fa/0 

•d 


1 


23 

LEWIS  F.  ALLEN,  a  sheep  raiser  of  Macedon,  Ontario  county, 
E".  Y.,  gave  the  Committee  the  following  statement : 

"  My  sheep  story  is  a  deplorable  one.  We  wanted  to  keep  100 
breeding  ewes  on  the  farm  and  had  a  good  start  with  58  registered 
Shropshires.  The  dogs  attacked  them  first  August  20,  1916,  and 
on  four  other  occasions  between  that  date  and  January  6,  1917, 
when  the  last  attack  occurred.  I  have  tried  everything  from 
watching  all  night  a  great  many  nights  to  keeping  them  closely 
housed.  On  January  6th,  the  dogs  dug  a  hole  under  the  shed  door 
and  killed  five  breeding  ewes.  Our  total  loss  since  August  20th 
is  34  head  of  registered  ewes;  12  of  them  were  ewe  lambs  —  the 
rest,  all  bred  ewes  or  ewes  with  lamb.  The  loss  in  our  county  in 
1916  is  the  greatest  we  have  ever  had,  and  the  loss  for  that  year 
is  not  included  in  the  abstract  of  dog  damage  which  I  have  made 
and  added  to  this  statement.  The  loss  for  the  year  1913  also  is 
not  included  in  the  following  statement.  We  are  literally  over-run 
with  dogs  of  every  description  during  the  days  when  hunting 
pheasants  is  permitted,  and  the  sheep  are  on  the  run  most  of  the 
time  on  these  days.  The  damage  to  sheep,  especially  in  hot 
weather,  must  be  attended  to  at  once  as  flies  soon  attack  wounded 
or  killed  sheep  and  it  is  necessary  from  a  sanitary  standpoint  to 
promptly  dispose  of  them.  The  dogs  from  the  city  of  Canandaigua 
are  responsible  in  a  large  measure  for  the  damage  in  the  town  of 
Canandaigua,  and  the  dogs  within  cities  of  the  third-class,  at 
least,  should  be  included  in  any  proposed  measure  which  is  de- 
signed to  protect  the  sheep.  Give  the  farmer  at  least  permission 
to  kill  a  dog  found  at  large  upon  his  farm  without  license  tag 
attached.  This  county  is  infested  with  dogs  and  unless  some  way 
is  found  to  decrease  the  number  sheep  raising  will  be  a  lost  art. 
In  our  county  the  number  has  decreased  from  100,000  in  1900  to 
35,000  in  1915.  An  industry  at  least  worth  $350,000,  even  at  this 
day,  is  being  ruined  by  a  few  thousand  dogs  worth  nothing  to  the 
human  family.  I  append  a  statement  of  the  amount  of  money 
paid  out  by  the  taxpayers  of  Ontario  county  by  towns  from  the 
years  1900  to  1915,  excluding,  of  course,  the  year  1913  and  the 
year  1916.  The  records  of  the  towns  show  payments  in  the  fol- 
lowing sums : 


Bristol $1,310  75 

Canadice 531  75 

East  Bloomfield 1.601  50 

Canandaigua 4,998  75 

Farmington 1,949  00 

Geneva 339  50 

Gorham 1,039  50 

Hopewell 414  00 

Manchester 2,080  00 

Naples 432  75 

Phelps ]  ,004  25 

Richmond 1,192  83 

Seneca 1,244  00 

South  Bristol    995  50 

Victor 2,073  25 

West  Bloomfield   .  999  75 


Total $22,811  08  " 


Space  does  not  permit  the  Committee  to  accompany  this  report 
with  more  testimony  of  similar  nature.  The  evidence  taken  by 
.the  Committee  upon  these  hearings  and  upon  all  the  subjects 
touched  upon  in  its  work  is  contained  in  thirteen  volumes  con- 
sisting of  approximately  twelve  thousand  pages,  and  evidence  of 
a  similar  nature  appears  in  many  places  in  those  volumes.  The 
purpose  in  presenting  these  extracts  from  the  testimony  is  to  pre- 
sent the  problems  in  the  language  of  the  witnesses  and  merely  to 
show  the  nature  of  the  testimony.  The  testimony  here  quoted 
or  summarized  is  corroborated  by  numerous  other  witnesses.  The 
flock  at  Cornell  University  and  at  the  Masonic  Home  near  Utica 
were  both  ravaged  last  season. 

It  seems  an  inevitable  conclusion  from  this  testimony  that  if 
the  dogs,  or  the  lack  of  protection  from  dogs,  is  not  the  direct 
cause  of  the  loss  of  the  business  of  sheep  husbandry  in  this  State, 
that  at  least  the  failure  of  the  State  to  provide  an  adequate  dog 
law  imposes  a  serious  burden  upon  the  industry  and  interposes 
a  serious  obstruction  to  the  restoration  of  the  business.  To  longer 
permit  the  ravages  of  an  animal  of  so  little  economic  value  as  the 
stray  dog  to  prevent  the  farmers  of  the  State  engaging  in  a  profit- 
able industry  and  one  which  inevitably  brings  great  wealth  to  our 
people  and  provides  an  abundant  supply  of  both  food  and  clothing. 


25 

would  certainly  be  a  serious  error.  The  Committee  unhesitatingly 
recommends  the  enactment  of  a  measure  so  drastic  in  its  terms  and 
with  such  ample  provision  for  its  effective  enforcement  that  it 
will  no  longer  be  possible  for  any  considerable  group  in  a  com- 
munity to  assert  that  the  absence  of  sheep  husbandry  from  this 
State  is  fairly  to  be  attributed  to  the  destruction  of  the  flocks 
by  stray  dogs.  In  1806,  1,068  sheep  were  killed  by  dogs  in  Dela- 
ware county  and  over  1,100  in  Niagara  county  alone. 

The  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  Farm  Bulletin 
N"o.  652,  makes  the  following  statement: 

Dogs  the  Main  Cause  of  Decrease  in  the  Number  of  Sheep 

*k  Sheep-killing  dogs  are  not  only  recognized  as  the  worst  enemy 
of  eastern  flockmasters  at  the  present  time,  but  are  known  to  be 
the  principal  cause  of  so  marked  a  decrease  in  the  number  of  sheep 
kept  on  farms.  The  moral  effect  upon  all  persons  who  have  seen 
sheep  killed,  injured,  or  frightened  by  dogs  is  far  more  destructive 
to  the  industry  than  the  actual  damage  sustained.  ~No  farmer 
contemplating  the  raising  of  sheep  is  likely  to  venture  on  the  en- 
terprise while  the  flocks  of  his  neighbors  are  continually  meeting 
reverses  through  the  attacks  of  dogs,  as  the  ultimate  financial 
losses  following  such  reverses  are  incalculable.  Dog  depredations 
to  flocks  are  not  only  disheartening  and  discouraging  to  the  flock- 
master,  but  they  also  break  up  breeding  plans  and  render  flocks 
restless  and  non-productive.  The  following  extract  from  a  letter 
published  in  an  eastern  farm  paper  is  indicative  of  the  fact  that 
sheep  owners  are  finally  forced  out  of  the  business  if  attacks  by 
dogs  are  long  continued.  It  also  expresses  the  general  sentiment 
of  sheep-owning  farmers  toward  dogs : 

'  We  have  grown  faint-hearted  and  joined  the  ranks  of  the 
sheepless.  Only  a  few  days  ago  the  last  of  the  sheep  were 
driven  off  the  farm.  I  watched  those  old  Merino  ewes  and 
their  foldy  necked  lambs  walk  down  the  road  and  out  of  sight 
and  a  lump  came  in  my  throat  and  the  tears  were  not  very  far 
back. 


2G 

'  Now  these  ewes,  the  remnant  of  the  flock,  are  gone.  Be- 
cause we  have  lost  interest  ?  No ;  far  from  it.  I  would  walk 
farther  to  see  a  good  Merino  than  any  other  animal.  Do  we 
think  tariff  changes  have  permanently  knocked  the  industry 
into  a  cocked  hat?  No;  not  that,  We  think  the  future  is 
bright,  and  the  golden  hoof  will  be  worth  as  much,  perhaps 
more,  as  a  woolgrower  as  in  years  just  past,  and  we  are  plan- 
ning to  have  the  Merino  again  in  the  barn  and  pasture.  The 
one  reason  for  present  abandonment  would  be  shouted  by 
thousands  of  shepherds  if  the  question  w7ere  put  —  just  dogs? 
Old  stuff?  Yes;  but  it's  ever  new  to  the  sheepman  of  eastern 
Ohio,  Pennsylvania  and  West  Virginia,  and  to  flock  owners 
everywhere.  The  man  who  has  walked  out  to  his  pasture  to 
find  dead,  torn,  bleeding,  crippled  and  scared  sheep  will  ap- 
preciate what  I  say. 

i  Reclaim  (a  farm  in  Ohio)  is  bounded  on  two  sides  by 
small  towns  with  a  dog  population  of  200 ;  1  mile  away  on 
another  side  is  another  town,  2  miles  away  on  the  remaining 
side  still  another  town,  both  with  more  dogs  than  people.  We 
have  found  our  sheep  dead,  found  them  with  throats  cut  and 
legs  torn  off,  found  them  huddled  together  in  the  farthest 
corner,  found  them  scared  out  on  the  public  highway,  in  our 
neighbor's  fields,  and  4  miles  from  home.  The  foreigner's 
dog  has  chased  them.  The  neighbor's  dog  has  chased  them. 
Dogs  of  all  kinds  seen  and  unseen  have  had  a  whack  at  our 
Merinos.  "Why  don't  you  shoot  them?"  "Why  don't  you 
keep  your  sheep  near  the  barn  ?"  "  I'd  poison  the  whole  dog 
tribe,"  and  many  like  remarks  are  made  by  folks  who  don't 
know.  You  who  have  had  experience  know  that  it's  no  small 
task  to  bring  the  sheep  to  the  barn  at  early  dusk  every  night 
and  to  make  frequent  visits  to  the  pasture  by  day  or  keep  a 
musket  strapped  to  your  back  or  standing  in  a  handy  fence 
corner  while  in  the  field  and  at  the  head  of  the  bed  at  night. 
It's  unlawful  to  scatter  poison,  and  not  altogether  safe. 

'  We  read  and  write  and  legislate,  debate  and  discuss,  quar- 
antine and  inspect  to  stamp  out  tuberculosis  in  cattle.  Like- 


27 

wise  do  we  agitate  over  hog  cholera  and  horse  glanders.  Our 
trees  and  plants  are  inspected,  and  we  insist  on  investigations 
and  regulations  and  the  stamping  out  of  various  things.  All 
this  is  good.  But  the  dog  that  has  done  more  to  ruin  an 
industry  to  which  many  men  owe  all  they  possess  goes 
marching  on  uncontrolled  and  uninvestigated,  throttling  our 
choicest  breeding  ewes,  chasing  the  calves,  rushing  through 
the  hen  yard  and  hog  lot,  carrying  hog  cholera  on  his  feet, 
carrying  stomach  worms  and  parasites  internal  and  external, 
spreading  rabies,  tramping  over  flower  bed  or  back  porch, 
practically  unrestrained,  enjoying  undisputed  rights,  and  all 
for  what?  Where  is  the  man  who  can  tell  what  great  or 
good  thing  the  dog  family  has  done  to  merit  all  this?  Why 
is  it  that  dog  laws  are  nearer  dead  letters  than  anything  else 
on  the  statute  books  ?  *  *  * 

1  The  dog  owner  always  comes  back  like  this :  "My  dog 
won't  chase  sheep."  Oh,  false  or  deluded  man !  The  dog  does 
not  live  with  such  good  blood  in  his  veins  but  what  will 
develop  into  a  sheep  killer  if  given  an  opportunity.  I  have 
seen  too  many  pairs  composed  of  one  mongrel  and  one  pedi- 
greed cur  crossing  the  farm  together  to  have  faith  in  dogdom. 
We're  hoping  that  the  sheep  and  wool  conference  at  Washing- 
ton will  be  the  beginning  of  great  things  for  sheep  husbandry. 
The  dog  was  discussed,  but  no  remedy  prescribed.  It's  a 
sorry  fact  that  custom  lias  so  overridden  the  law  that  the  dog 
is  still  on  top  regardless  of  dog  laws.' 

The  Habits  of  the  Sheep-Killing  Dog 

"  Sheep-killing  dogs  work  both  singly  and  in  groups,  but  usually 
in  twos  and  threes.  They  do  not  limit  their  attacks  to  the  flocks 
of  the  immediate  vicinity  in  which  they  are  kept,  but  travel  for 
miles  in  all  directions,  spreading  destruction  in  the  flocks  with 
which  they  come  in  contact.  Because  their  work  is  so  often  done 
under  the  cover  of  darkness  it  is  almost  impossible  to  catch  them 
in  the  act  of  worrying  the  sheep,  and  hence  they  can  seldom  be 
positively  identified. 


28 

"  The  ways  in  which  different  dogs  attack  and  destroy  vary 
greatly.  Some  dogs  simply  kill  one  or  two  sheep  in  a  flock,  while 
others  continue  the  attack  until  all  the  sheep  are  either  destroyed 
or  crippled.  In  many  cases  where  large  numbers  are  killed  they 
are  neither  bitten  nor  wounded,  but  simply  chased  until  they  die 
from  exhaustion. 

"After  a  dog  has  once  formed  the  habit  of  killing  sheep,  it 
seemingly  becomes  a  mania  with  him,  and  he  is  seldom,  if  ever, 
broken  of  it.  He  not  only  destroys  sheep  himself,  but  leads  other 
dogs  to  the  work.  ~No  consideration  should  be  given  such  dogs; 
if  additional  losses  to  flocks  from  this  source  are  to  be  avoided, 
they  should  be  dispatched  as  soon  as  their  habits  are  known." 

Estimated  Annual  Number  of  Sheep  Killed  by  Dogs 

"  That  dogs  are  a  real  hindrance  to  the  sheep  industry  is  not 
only  acclaimed  by  the  testimony  of  thousands  of  sheep  owners 
whose  flocks  have  suffered  through  ravages  by  them,  but  is  verified 
by  figures  showing  a  conservative  estimate  of  the  partial  loss  in- 
curred by  flockowners  during  the  year  1913.  These  figures,  given 
in  Table  I,  were  compiled  from  the  reports  of  county  treasurers 
of  different  States,  giving  the  number  of  sheep  killed  by  dogs  and 
paid  for  by  the  several  counties  during  the  year.  Not  all  counties 
or  States  reported  these  losses,  as  in  many  cases  no  law  existed 
which  empowered  the  county  to  pay  for  sheep  killed ;  for  this  rea- 
son it  was  necessary  to  compute  the  total  loss  on  a  percentage 
basis. 


29 


COUNTIES 

Xumber  of 
sheep  in 
counties 
reporting 
(  census 
1910) 
809,274 
314,539 
877,039 
793,615 
21,792 
23,037 
112,506 
8,110 
180,261 
,123,324 
501,131 
272,627 
15,794 
494,799 
289,094 

Number 
of 
sheep 
paid  for 
in  1913 
1,347 
3,045 
8,026 
4,015 
231 
258 
45 
56 
298 
9,619 
3,125 
100 
56 
.  2,873 
1,589 

Total 
sheep 
killed  in 
State  at 
same  ratio 
1,920 
12,749 
11,429 
6,676 
2,384 
381 
153 
290 
1,446 
15,561 
5,396 
266 
415 
4,355 
4,513 

STATE 

Total 
number 

102 
92 
99 
120 
23 
14 
93 
10 
62 
88 
67 
96 
14 
100 
55 

Number 
reporting 
72 
25 
76 
68 
3 
11 
40 
2 
10 
51     2 
43 
25 
2 
56 
18 

Indiana  

Kentucky 

AIa.rvla.nd         .  .              ... 

\Tas^a  chusGtts 

Nebraska                   .        .  . 

Vew  Hampshire  . 

New  York   
Ohio 

Pennsylvania  
Tennessee   

Vermont  

Virginia 

YVc<t  Virginia            

Total. 


1,035 


502     6,836,942          34,683          67,934 


"  Twenty  one  farm  States  not  shown  in  the  above  table  have 
7,851,000  sheep.  At  the  same  average  rate  of  loss  these  21  States 
would  lose  annually  39,826  sheep,  making  a  total  annual  loss  for 
36  farm  States  of  107,760  sheep. 

"  While  the  estimated  annual  loss  in  numbers  of  sheep  killed 
by  dogs  shown  in  the  table  is  seemingly  small,  in  that  it  is  less  than 
1  per  cent  of  the  total  number  of  sheep  in  the  farm  States,  it 
should  be  remembered  that  a  1  per  cent  loss  on  a  business  that  is 
being  conducted  on  a  5  or  6  per  cent  profit  basis  is  serious  and 
clearly  cuts  the  average  profits  of  all  engaged  in  the  industry  by 
one-fifth  or  one-sixth  of  the  total  that  should  be  received.  But  the 
actual  loss  incurred  is  undoubtedly  far  greater  than  is  here  given, 
as  this  partial  loss  is  estimated  only  upon  sheep  reported  as  killed 
and  paid  for  by  counties ;  it  is  known  that  there  are  many  killed 
which  are  not  reported.  Then  too,  this  estimate  does  not  take 
into  consideration  the  retardation  in  the  development  of  the  in- 
dustry suffered  through  prospective  sheep  men  being  kept  out  of 
it  on  account  of  the  dog  problem.  As  has  been  previously  stated. 


30 

the   ultimate   losses    from    sources    of   this    nature    can    not    be 
estimated." 

PRESENT  STATE  DOG  LAW 

The  present  State  dog  law  is  absolutely  ineffective  and  fails  in 
its  purpose  either  to  protect  the  flocks  or  to  compensate  the  owners 
for  sheep  when  killed.  Practically,  the  State  has  no-  useful  legis- 
lation upon  this  subject  at  this  time. 

Enforcement 

Any  dog  law  is  valueless  unless  it  carries  with  it  by  its  own 
weight  effective  measures  for  its  enforcement,  which  should  be 
State-wide  and  uniform,  except  perhaps  in  the  first  and  second- 
class  cities. 

Virginia  Legislation 

At  the  1914  session  of  the  Virginia  State  Legislature,  an  act 
was  passed  that  dogs  should  not  be  permitted  to  run  at  large.  It 
is  a  misdemeanor  for  the  owner  of  a  dog  to  allow  the  same  to  leave 
his  premises  unattended,  and  for  dogs  taxed  by  incorporated  vill- 
ages or  cities  to  leave  the  city  limits  under  like  conditions.  Any 
person  is  at  liberty-  to  kill  a  dog  ranging  or  running  at  large  un- 
attended outside  of  the  limits  of  a  city  or  incorporated  village. 
If  this  law  is  applied  and  enforced,  as  is  said  by  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture  bulletin,  the  sheep  industry  can  suffer 
no  damage  from  dogs  and  losses  from  that  source  will  be  elimi- 
nated. 

Proposed  Law 

A  dog  law  should  be  enacted  in  this  State:  First,  placing  a 
license  fee  or  tax  on  each  dog,  making  it  expensive  to  keep  a  worth- 
less one;  second,  providing  that  a  dog  may  be  killed  by  any  one, 
(a)  when  caught  chasing  or  killing  sheep  or  other  live-stock  or 
poultry;  (b)  when  caught  off  the  owner's  premises  unattended, 
ranging  or  running  at  large;  (c)  when  not  duly  licensed.  Also 
providing  that  dogs  should  be  killed  by  the  local  authorities  or  the 
Department  of  Agriculture;  (a)  when  it  is  established  before  a 
magistrate  that  the  owner  or  harbor er  has  failed  to  pay  the  tax 


31 

and  secured  the  license  for  the  animal  within  the  time  allowed 
by  law;  (b)  that  within  a  period  of  four  months  prior  to  the  com- 
plaint to  the  magistrate,  the  dog  has  worried  or  pursued  sheep  or 
other  live-stock  or  poultry,  or  injured  the  same;  (c)  when  it  is 
proved  before  the  magistrate  that  within  a  period  of  four  months 
before  the  complaint,  the  animal  has  been  permitted  to  range 
and  run  at  large  outside  the  limits  of  the  city  or  incorporated 
village  unattended  or  not  under  reasonable  control.  Third:  In 
addition,  the  act  should  provide  for  an  adequate  fund  and  to 
promptly  pay  all  established  sheep  damage  claims. 

The  Philadelphia  Wool  and  Textile  Association  has  issued  the 
following  statement  upon  this  subject,  which  is  included  in  this 
report  because  of  its  statistical  value,  and  the  same  is  respectfully 
called  to  the  attention  of  the  Legislature.  It  seems  to  be  a  question 
of  food  and  fabrics  versus  dogs.  The  Committee  is  of  the  opinion 
that  it  applies  more  emphatically  to  the  State  of  New  York  than 
to  the  State  of  Pennsylvania : 

More  8heep  Vital  Need  of  America 

"According  to  statistics,  the  population  of  the  United  States 
consumes  more  wheat  than  any  other  country  in  the  world,  with 
the  exception  of  Australia.  According  to  the  census  of  1910,  the 
meat-packing  industry  holds  the  first  place  among  all  the  manu- 
facturing industries  of  the  United  States  in  the  value  of  product, 
and,  according  to  the  census,  the  output  of  the  meat-packing  indus- 
try of  this  country  was  valued  at  $1,370,000,000. 

"  During  a  recent  year  the  production  of  meats  on  the  hoof  on 
the  American  farm  is  given  as  8,265,000,000  pounds  of  beef, 
409,000,000  pounds  of  veal,  987,000,000  pounds  of  mutton  and 
lamb,  and  6,856,000,000  pounds  of  pork. 

"  The  meat  supply  of  this  country  is  practically  all  domestic 
production,  and  an  adequate  supply  of  meat  food  is  a  vital  neces- 
sity for  our  population.  The  increased  cost  for  the  table  of  meat 
products  during  late  years  has  caused  wide  discussion  and  has 
affected  the  living  expenses  of  every  family.  The  cause  for  this 
advance  in  meat  prices  has  been  very  widely  attributed  to  manipu- 
lation by  the  big  meat  packers  and  they  have  been  sharply  criticised 
as  being  the  cause  of  these  higher  prices.  It  is,  however,  the  gen- 


32 

erally  accepted  maxim  of  trade  that -prices  are  regulated  by  supply 
and  demand,  and  the  careful  consideration  of  statistics  will  show 
quite  plainly  that  it  is  this  law  which  has  operated  to  advance  the 
price  of  meats. 

Cost  of  Sheep  Rises 

"  To  take  up  this  question  as  it  relates  especially  to  sheep.  In 
1901  sheep  sold  on  the  hoof  at  7  cents  to  8  cents  per  pound,  in 
1915  at  12  cents  per  pound  —  and  in  applying  this  law  of  supply 
and  demand  it  should  he  noted  that,  according  to  statistics,  the 
number  of  sheep  of  sheep-bearing  age  in  1901  Avas  41,903,000, 
whilst  in  1915  the  number  was  36,668,000,  a  decrease  of  5,235,- 
000,  and  that  during  this  period  the  population  increased  from 
about  80,000,000  to  100,000,000;  in  other  words,  about  25  per 
cent. 

"  Of  course,  correlative  to  this  situation  as  regards  the  meat 
supply  from  sheep,  the  supply  of  wool  for  clothing  purposes  shows 
relatively  the  same  results. 

"  The  need  of  our  people  for  warm  clothing  made  from  wool 
is  as  imperative  as  their  need  for  meat.  There  has  been  no  time, 
even  when  this  country  produced  the  largest  quantity  of  wool, 
that  this  production  was  sufficient  to  supply  the  needs  of  our  peo- 
ple for  clothing,  and  it  has  been  necessary  to  import  very  large 
quantities  from  foreign  countries  to  meet  those  requirements. 

"  The  space  of  this  article  is  not  sufficient  to  go  fully  into  de- 
tails of  the  history  of  the  wool  production  of  this  country,  but  it 
can  be  stated  generally  that  the  sheep  industry  has  followed  the 
lines  of  least  resistance  and  that  during  its  progress  has  shown  the 
greatest  production  from  time  to  time  in  sections  of  the  country 
where  there  were  available  vast  areas  of  cheap  land  not  yet  utilized 
for  the  production  of  cereal  crops. 

"  The  fact,  however,  can  be  stated  briefly  that  it  is  apparent 
to  those  who  are  cognizant  of  the  situation  today  that  the  AVOO! 
industry  has  reached  the  height  of  its  production  in  this  respect, 
and  we  must  now  turn  to  the  small  farmers  for  assistance  to  in- 
crease our  flocks. 

"  The  development  for  the  last  few  years  has  shown  an  alarming- 
condition  in  regard  to  the  decrease  of  our  flocks,  and  it  should  be 
impressed  upon  every  one  that  it  is  an  iinpfcrtttire  national  econo- 


The  champion  of  the  Dutchess  County  Dairy  Improvement  Association  in  1916 
This  cow  gave  13,270  pounds  of  milk  containing  427.7  pounds  of  butter  fat 


33 

mic  proposition  to  have  this  diminution  of  our  supplies  of  this 
nature  checked.  And,  moreover,  looking  to  the  future,  it  is  ap- 
parent that  action  must  be  taken  to  increase  our  production  to 
meet  the  demands  of  an  increasing  population. 

"As  regards  the  situation  of  our  people  for  supplies  from  abroad, 
the  development  of  this  great  war  has  shown  us  plainly  that  we 
are  at  the  mercy  of  foreign  powers  in  regard  to  these  supplies. 
It  is,  therefore,  a  matter  which  affects  us  not  only  as  an  economic 
proposition,  but  also  as  a  national  policy  of  preparedness,  to  be 
independently  situated  to  meet  a  possible  demand  for  the  clothing 
of  our  army  and  our  navy. 

"  There  is  no  reason  why  the  United  States  should  not  produce 
practically  all  necessary  supplies  of  wool  and  mutton  in  its  own 
territory,  and  if  we  fail  to  do  so  and  do  not  meet  the  situation 
which  is  developing,  it  will  be  due  entirely  to  culpable  neglect 
and  apathy  on  our  part. 

'*  We  have  great  areas  of  land  especially  adapted  to  raising 
sheep  in  small  flocks,  which  are  unproductive  today,  and  which 
can  be  utilized  for  this  purpose  to  the  greatest  possible  advantage. 
And  right  here  in  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  the  British 
Islands,  whose  area  is  equal,  approximately,  to  only  two-fifths  of 
the  area  of  the  State  of  Texas,  produced  in  1915  approximately 
120,000,000  pounds  of  wool,  whilst  the  total  production  of  the 
entire  United  States  was,  approximately,  288,000,000  pounds  of 
wool,  and  moreover,  figuring  on  the  usual  basis  of  scoured  produc- 
tion, the  amount  produced  of  clean  wool  in  the  United  Kingdom 
is  practically  equivalent  to  the  amount  of  clean  wool  produced  in 
the  United  States.  From  this  comparison  between  the  relative 
position  of  sheep  in  the  British  Isles  and  in  the  United  States, 
the  figures  for  consumption  by  the  people  of  these  two  countries 
shows  logically  as  follows:  The  people  of  the  United  States  eat 
6M>  pounds  of  mutton  per  capita,  while  the  English  eat  26 
pounds  per  capita. 

Great  Sheep  Country  Idle 

"Throughout  the  llill  and  mountain  ranges  which  stretch  along 
our  entire  eastern  section  from  New  Hampshire  to  Georgia  are 
thousands  of  acres  now  practically  unproductive  which  should  be 

2 


34 

utilized  for  the  purpose  of  raising  sheep.  We  are  in  the  position 
of  a  man  who  has  a  plant  equipped  for  the  profitable  production 
of  needed  material,  but  whose  machinery  lies  idle  and  unproduc- 
tive because  he  is  too  shiftless  and  lazy  to  operate  it. 

u  In  our  own  State  of  Pennsylvania,  for  instance,  we  have  con- 
ditions which  are  typical  of  those  which  exist  throughout  the  sec- 
tions above  noted.  We  have  many  acres  of  hill  and  valley  suitable 
for  sheep  raising  where  in  former  years  could  be  found  a  much 
greater  number  of  sheep  than  exists  today. 

"  Statistics  show  that  the  flocks  of  sheep  have  decreased  in  this 
State  during  the  last  seven  years ;  that  the  production  of  wool  has 
fallen  off  33  1/3  per  cent.  ]$"ow  let  it  be  known  and  thoroughly 
understood  that  the  fundamental  cause  for  the  decrease  of  sheep 
is  the  fact  that  the  ravages  of  dogs  throughout  our  rural  districts 
have  so  discouraged  farmers  that  they  have  given  up  keeping  sheep 
to  a  large  extent,  as  it  is  shown  by  the  statistics  quoted. 

5,000  Sheep  Kitted  by  Dogs  in  Pennsylvania 

"  Notwithstanding  the  increased  number  of  dogs  killed  in  the 
agricultural  counties,  the  slaughter  of  sheep  by  dogs  made  a  sub- 
stantial increase  during  1915  over  the  previous  year.  Mad  dogs 
also  gathered  in  a  large  toll  of  horses,  mules,  cattle  ard  swine  than 
the  year  before,  according  to  a  statistical  table  just  prepared  by 
the  State  Department  of  Agriculture. 

"  Deaths  of  5,808  sheep  during  1915  are  attributed  to  dogs, 
the  number  killed  in  1914  being  5,187.  The  number  of  injured 
sheep  is  fixed  at  4,764,  an  increase  of  nearly  a  thousand  over  the 
year  before. 

"  The  State  of  Pennsylvania  has  recently  amended  the  dog  laws 
to  make  them  decidedly  more  stringent,  these  amendments  going 
into  effect  the  1st  of  January,  1916.  The  operation  of  this  law 
has  not  proceeded  far  enough  to  give  intelligent  basis  as  to  whether 
it  will  bring  the  required  results  or  not.  It  is  common  experience 
that  good  laws  may  exist,  but  be  futile  from  lack  of  enforcement, 
It  is  necessary  to  have  the  strong  support  of  public  sentiment  and 
public  interest  behind  the  laws  to  make  them  effective,  and  the 
people  of  the  State  of  Pennsylvania  should  be  awakened  to  the 
facts  above  presented  and  interest  themselves  in  every  way  pos- 


35 

sible  to  see  that  these  laws  are  enforced,  because  it  affects  directly 
the  interests  of  the  two  fundamental  necessities  of  life  to  them: 
their  food  and  clothing. 

Sheep  versus  Dog 

"  The  question  resolves  itself  finally,  therefore,  into  the  propo- 
sition, not  only  in  Pennsylvania,  but  in  all  the  other  States, 
whether  the  people  are  going  to  tolerate  this  dog  nuisance  or  abate 
it  by  adequate  laws  strictly  enforced.  It  is  generally  conceded  by 
those  who  know  that  the  farmers  will  be  glad  to  increase  their 
flocks,  which  are  a  profitable  adjunct  to  any  farm,  if  they  are 
given  the  needed  protection  from  dogs. 

"It  is  not  the  desire  or  the  intention  to  annihilate  the  dog. 
The  writer  of  this  article  loves  a  good  dog.  It  should  be  realized, 
however,  that  the  possession  of  a  dog  must  be  governed  and  re- 
stricted by  wise  laws  which,  while  permitting  their  existence,  will 
not  allow  them  to  be  a  source  of  damage  and  danger  to  the  com- 
munity. We  recognize,  for  instance,  the  value  of  the  motor-driven 
car  as  a  means  of  transportation,  but  we  regulate  and  control  its 
operation;  we  recognize  the  tremendous  value  of  our  great  rail- 
way systems,  but  these,  also,  we  regulate  and  control. 

"  Let  us  therefore,  appreciate  the  fact  that  the  regulation  and 
restriction  of  the  dog  has  become  a  national  economic  proposition 
and  that  it  is  as  necessary  to  bring  the  dog  under  the  control  of 
the  law  as  any  of  the  other  factors  which  are  thus  regulated  for 
the  public  welfare. 

"  The  Philadelphia  Wool  and  Textile  Association  has  taken  this 
matter  up  energetically,  and  has  entered  into  a  national  campaign 
for  the  protection  of  sheep  from  dogs  in  the  various  States,  and 
thereafter  for  the  education  and  encouragement  of  the  farmers  to 
keep  sheep.  The  Philadelphia  Wool  and  Textile  Association  de- 
sires that  the  public  shall  understand  this  situation  so  that  the 
people  will  co-operate  and  sustain  it  in  its  efforts. 

"  The  jury  of  the  people  must  decide  this  case  of  Sheep  vs.  Dog ; 
they  must  decide  whether  they  will  tolerate  the  ravages  of  a  destruc- 
tive animal  or  whether  they  will  protect  that  wealth-producing 
animal  which  according  to  archeology,  was  the  first  to  be  domesti- 


36 

cated  by  man,  and  the  one  which,  taking  all  things  into  considera- 
tion, has  been  of  the  greatest  value  to  supply  the  real  necessities 
of  human  existence." 

DAIRY  PRODUCTS 

At  the  outset  of  this  survey,  the  Committee  endeavored  to  secure 
accurate  and  reliable  statistics  as  to  the  amount  and  value  of  dairy 
products  produced  in  this  State  during  the  year  1915,  the  year  to 
which  for  obvious  reasons,  this  survey  was  attempted  to  be  confined. 
Substantially  how  many  pounds  of  butter,  how  many  pounds  of 
cheese,  how  many  pounds,  quarts  or  gallons  of  market  milk  were 
produced  and  consumed  by  the  people  of  this  State  during  that 
year?  It  would  seem  that  this  knowledge  was  so  important  that 
the  figures  should  have  been  readily  accessible.  We  have  not  been 
able  to  obtain  reliable  and  complete  data  upon  this  point.  The 
Committee  attempted  and  is  now  attempting  to  secure  such  data 
by  the  best  methods  available  and  hopes  later  to  be  able  to  present 
somewhat  more  definite  and  accurate  figures  on  these  subjects  than 
have  yet  been  secured.  Such  statistics  as  are  available  do  not  show 
encouraging  conditions  in  the  dairy  industry.  Statistics  presented 
to  this  Committee  show  that  during  the  years  from  1905  to  1915, 
the  population  of  this  State  increased  from  8,067,308  in  1905,  to 
9,687,744  in  1915  —  an  increase  of  1,620,436;  that  in  the  year 
1900,  the  dairy  cows  in  this  State  were  enumerated  at  a  total  of 
1,501,608,  and  that  the  enumeration  of  1910  showed  1,509,594  - 
or  an  increase  in  number  of  7,986.  Obviously,  the  number  of  dairy 
cows  and  the  production  therefrom  has  failed  to  keep  pace  with 
the  growth  of  population.  It  is  undeniable  that  during  the  same 
period  the  number  of  persons  engaged  in  the  production  of  dairy 
products  has  decreased.  This  is  established  by  the  figures  showing 
an  increasing  acreage  of  abandoned  tillable  land,  and  a  decreasing 
population  of  the  rural  towns.  These  figures  account,  in  part  at 
least,  for  the  increased  cost  of  dairy  products  to  the  population  of 
this  State  and  is  one  of  the  obvious  explanations  of  the  high  cost 
of  living. 

The  Federal  Census  Report  of  1910  gives  the  total  number  of 
dairy   cows  in  the   State  as   1,509,594;   the  number   of   calves, 


37 

438,329,  making  a  total  of  1,947,923  head.  The  State  of  New 
York  Census  of  Livestock  and  Crops  of  1915,  made  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture  in  co-operation  with  the  Education  Depart- 
ment, gives  the  following  figures : 

Number  of  dairy  cows  two  years  and  over 1,301,754 

Number  of  yearling  heifers 292,368 

Number  of  calves  raised  in  1915 343,782 


A  total  of 1,937,894 


Records  of  milk  distributing  companies  show  that  the  average 
production  of  their  patrons'  herds  in  1902  was  278  pounds  of  milk 
per  day  per  herd.  In  1916  this  average  production  was  204  pounds 
per  day,  a  decrease  of  18.7  per  cent. 

The  first  figures  would  show  an  actual  decrease  from  the  Federal 
enumeration  of  1910,  of  10,029  head.  For  various  reasons,  lack  of 
facility,  equipment,  and  so  forth,  the  State  enumeration  may  not  be 
absolutely  accurate,  but  it  is  undoubtedly  sufficiently  so  to  make 
clear  the  fact  that  there  has  been  no  substantial  growth  of  the  dairy 
industry  in  the  State  during  the  past  five  years  to  keep  pace  with 
the  growing  population,  if,  indeed,  there  has  not  been  an  absolute 
loss.  The  milk  company  records  prove  the  reduction  in  cows  per 
dairy. 

That  the  State  was  and  is  threatened  writh  the  possible  decay  of 
the  dairy  industry  is  apparent.  No  problem  of  equal  importance 
confronts  the  people  of  this  State  and  the  problem  is  a  more  vital 
one  to  the  inhabitants  of  our  large  cities  than  to  the  agricultural 
communities.  The  fanner,  in  whatever  activity  he  is  engaged, 
can  always  and  easily  provide  himself  with  sufficient  dairy  products 
for  his  own  use,  but  from  what  source  and  at  what  price  the  inhabi- 
tants of  our  cities  are  to  secure  an  abundant  supply  of  wholesome 
milk,  butter  and  cheese  is  a  far  more  serious  proposition.  Unde- 
niably, animal  husbandry  and  the  production  of  milk,  butter  and 
cheese  is  the  surest  and  most  permanent  source  of  wealth  in  any 
State.  An  abundant  supply  of  these,  products  ensures  against 
famine  and  want  for  the  present  and  ensures  the  fertility  of  the 
soil  for  the  coming  generations.  No  other  industry  or  agricultural 


38 

pursuit  can  supply  the  loss.  Sheep  husbandry  has  already  departed 
and  the  art,  if  it  has  not  already  disappeared,  is  rapidly  disappear- 
ing. Our  farmers  who  wish  to  re-engage  in  that  industry  must 
even  now  seek  skilled  help  from  without  the  State.  Shall  the  dairy 
industry  be  allowed  to  folloAV  that  of  sheep  raising?  It  must  al- 
ways be  borne  in  mind  also  that  such  industries  when  once  decayed 
or  lost  are  not  easily  restored.  It  is  perfectly  possible,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Committee,  to  seriously  endanger  and  cripple  the  dairy 
industry  in  the  State  by  unfavorable  conditions  continuing  for  a 
period  of  say  five  to  ten  years.  When  the  dairyman,  because  of 
such  conditions,  ha,s  once  abandoned  the  pursuit,  even  with  more 
favorable  conditions  it  is  not  so  easily  restored.  The  reasons  that 
have  prevented  the  further  growth  of  the  dairy  industry  in  the 
State  are  not  far  to  seek. 

CONCLUSION  AS  TO  CONDITIONS  THREATENING  THE  PROSPERITY 
OF  THE  DAIRY  INDUSTRY 

The  Committee  is  of  the  opinion  and  accordingly  reports  that 
during  a  period  of  several  years  the  dairy  farmer,  laboring  indus- 
triously and  thriftily  as  he  might,  was  not  able  to  procure  such 
reasonable  price  from  the  sale  of  dairy  products  in  this  State  as  to 
earn  a  fair  labor  and  invested  capital  return.  If  the  producers  are 
unable  to  secure  a  fair  labor  return.,  the  industry  must  necessarily 
decay  in  this  State,  resulting  in  higher  prices  to  the  consumer  for 
corresponding  products  brought  from  distant  fields  or  countries  to 
which  other  and  equally  favorable  markets  are  more  accessible. 
The  consumer  can  only  be  assured  of  an  abundant  supply  of  these 
necessary  products,  and  the  State  can  only  retain  this  important 
industry  within  its  borders,  ensuring  present  food  and  future  fer- 
tility of  our  soil,  by  endeavoring  to  bring  about  such  conditions  as 
will  provide  to  the  producer  a  fair  and  reasonable  return  for  his 
labor  and  invested  capital.  That  the  dairy  farmer  was  unable  to 
earn  a  fair  and  adequate  return  in  the  industry  during  several 
years  past  was  conclusively  established,  in  the  judgment  of  this 
Committee,  by  abundant  evidence  in  practically  every  farming 
community  in  this  State.  -Many  remedies  have  been  suggested  for 
this  condition.  It  is  frequently  said  the  farmer  must  be  more 
efficient. 


39 

AGRICULTURAL  EFFICIENCY 

The  Committee  is  constrained  to  the  belief  that  the  average 
dairyman  is  as  thrifty  and  efficient  in  his  chosen  pursuit  as  the 
average  man  in  other  walks  of  life.  The  hours  of  labor  of  the  in- 
dividual engaged  therein  are  longer  and  more  arduous  per  diem 
than  are  those  in  any  other  walk  of  life  known  to  us.  No  threat- 
ened strike  or  Congressional  action  can  lighten  his  task  or  shorten 
his  daily  toil.  The  complete  task  renews  itself  with  every  sun  and 
is  not  finished  while  daylight  lasts.  In  the  old  days,  it  was  some- 
what of  a  seasonal  occupation  and  the  winter  lightened  the  constant 
toil,  but  under  present  market  milk  conditions  there  is  and  can  be 
little  season.  Neither  Sundays  nor  holidays  bring  him  relief  from 
his  daily  work.  It  must  be  performed  that  the  rest  of  the  com- 
munity may  live  and  receive  its  constant  daily  supply  of  dairy 
products.  For  years,  too,  the  dairyman  has  readily  availed  himself 
of  all  means  of  information  and  education  offered  by  the  State. 
We  doubt  if  there  is  another  group  of  men  in  any  corresponding 
industry  so  well  informed  as  to  their  craft,  so  keenly  interested  in 
its  progress,  and  so  eager  for  success  as  the  dairy  farmers  of  the 
State  of  New  York.  Going  about  their  farms  or  examining  them 
under  oath,  it  is  difficult  to  find  where  they  waste  their  time,  labor 
or  material  and  where  all  the  energies  reasonably  possible  are  not 
devoted  to  individual  success.  It  has  frequently  been 
stated  and  pled  that  the  solution  of  the  dairymen's  prob- 
lem is  to  have  one  cow  which  will  produce  as  much  milk 
as  two  or  three  of  the  average  cows  on  the  average  dairy 
farm,  and  that  the  dairy  farmer  is  at  fault  because  he  has 
not  already  achieved  that  end.  In  other  words,  that  he  must 
supply  himself  with  the  doubly-efficient  cow.  It  is  the  judgment 
of  this  Committee  that  it  is  much  easier  and  simpler  to  state  this 
remedy  than  to  bring  about  such  conditions.  It  has  perhaps  taken 
something  like  five  thousand  years  to  produce  the  average  cow  of 
the  average  efficiency  as  we  now  know  her.  It  will  take  a  long 
period  of  time  and  the  efforts  of  many  men  to  double  the  present 
average  efficiency.  If  the  State  of  New  York  is  to  be  supplied 
with  dairy  products  only  by  dairy  cows  that  produce  seven  thou- 
sand pounds  of  milk  per  annum  and  if  such  cows  are  to  be  the  only 
source  of  supply,  we  venture  the  prediction  that  our  inhabitants 


40 

for  the  next  fifty  years  will  be  compelled  to  pay  far  more  than 
the  present  prices  for  milk,  'butter  and  cheese.  We  do  not  mean 
to  suggest  that  the  large-producing  cow  is  not  to  be  sought  for, 
wished  for,  and  worked  for  by  all  means  available,  but  we  do 
mean  to  suggest  that  a  ready  supply  of  such  large-producing 
animals  furnishes  no  present  solution  of  the  dairy  problems  in 
this  State.  They  are  unavailable  and  impossible  to  secure  in  suffi- 
cient number  either  to  supply  our  people  with  food  or  to  prevent 
the  possible  decay  of  the  dairy  industry  as  a  whole.  The  problem 
in  this  State  is  to  preserve  the  average  dairy  industry  and  the 
average  dairy  cow  and  to  provide  for  the  average  dairy  farmer 
a  reasonable  labor  return  from  his  efforts  under  present  conditions. 

COST  OF  PRODUCTION  OF  MILK  IN  THIS  STATE  DURING  RECENT 

YEARS 

The  Committee  has  made  exhaustive  inquiries  upon  this  subject 
in  practically  every  dairy  county  of  the  State.  The  number  of 
witnesses  examined  upon  this  point  approximate  nearly  two 
hundred.  They  range  in  type  from  the  men  at  the  head  of  our 
agricultural  educational  institutions,  Farm  Bureau  agents, 
breeders  of  high-grade  stock,  plain  market  milk  producers,  and  the 
industrious  occupant  of  the  remote  hill  farm,  sturdily  endeavoring 
to  support  a  home  by  the  individual  efforts  of  himself  and  family. 
We  have  had  testimony  practically  from  every  dairy  community 
in  this  State.  This  testimony  was  taken  under  conditions  which 
made  for  its  reliability  and  accuracy.  It  was  not  received  by  the 
Committee  in  the  form  of  prepared  papers,  irresponsible  declara- 
tions, or  through  paid  agents  interested  in  sustaining  a  given 
proposition.  Hearsay  and  guesswork  were  practically  eliminated. 
It  was  sought  and  taken  largely  under  the  same  conditions  as 
would  apply  to  the  giving  of  testimony  to  establish  facts  in  a  com- 
petent court. 

The  Committee  had  no  retainer  to  establish  any  given  proposi- 
tion, but  sought  to  ascertain  as  diligently  as  it  might  the  true 
facts.  The  witnesses  were  closely  cross-examined  and  every  credit 
item  to  which  the  dairy  was  entitled  was  endeavored  to  be  estab- 
lished and  brought  out. 


Pasture  scene  on  the  estate  of  William  P.  Clyde,  New  Hamburg,  N.  Y.  This  is 
not  a  commercial  dairy  but  simply  one  typifying  hundreds  of  herds  on  private  estates 
in  the  lower  Hudson  valley 


41 

It  was  much  easier  to  establish  and  clearly  set  forth  the  credit 
items  of  the  production  account  than  it  was  to  secure  and  bring 
into  the  record  all  the  debit  items  which  under  any  just  system  of 
accounting  should  be  charged  as  a  legitimate  expense.  The  Com- 
mittee is  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  if  labor  and  cost  items  were 
charged  against  dairy  products  as  fully  and  accurately  as  they 
are  charged  upon  manufactured  articles,  transportation,  and  dis- 
tribution, it  would  be  established  that  the  cost  of  milk  production 
is  considerably  higher  than  that  shown  in  the  evidence  presented 
to  us,  extracts  of  which  are  presented  herewith.  It  must  always 
be  remembered  that  in  ascertaining  the  cost  of  production  of  dairy 
products,  very  little,  if  any,  account  is  taken  of  the  value  of  the 
services  of  the  farm  women  or  members  of  the  family,  other  than 
the  hired  help  and  the  master  of  the  farm.  The  consumer  receives 
the  full  benefit  of  this  skilled,  diligent  and  necessary  labor  sub- 
stantially without  the  same  being  taken  into  consideration  or 
valued  by  any  competent  system  of  cost  accounting.  The  only 
compensation  of  the  average  dairy  housewife  is  the  general  pros- 
perity of  the  household.  Her  particular  reward  is  food  and  cloth- 
ing. If  the  industry  of  the  household  is  such  as  not  to  procure  a 
labor  return  which  makes  for  the  general  prosperity  of  the  family, 
the  labor  of  these  members  of  the  household  remains  unpaid, 
except  for  a  meager  livelihood.  Society  receives  the  benefit  of  her 
productive  labor  without  making  just  compensation  therefor. 
This  amounts  practically  to  unpaid  service  upon  the  dairy  farm 
not  only  for  the  housewife,  but  for  the  maturing  sons  and 
daughters.  That  these  services  have  not  been  fairly  compensated 
is  sufficiently  well  established  by  the  evidence  taken  before  us.  Is 
it  to  be  marvelled  at,  then,  that  the  housewife  and  the  younger 
members  of  the  family  seek  ways  and  means  to  abandon  dairy 
farming  and  to  escape  to  the  manufacturing  centers  where  their 
hours  of  labor  will  be  shorter,  strict  accounting  made  therefor,  and 
fair  compensation  received  ? 


42 


CONCLUSIONS  AS  TO  THE  COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION  IN  ! 

EN  GLAND. 

In  co-operation  with  the  Federal  Department  of  Agriculture, 
the  State  Departments  of  Agriculture,  Agricultural  Colleges  and 
State  Granges,  the  State  Dairymen's  Association  and  county 
agents  of  each  State  respectively,  sixteen  hearings  were  held 
throughout  New  England  by  a  sub-committee  of  the  Committee 
on  Agriculture  of  the  Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  upon  this 
subject  in  the  year  1914. 

About  twenty-five  hundred  farmers  attended  these  hearings, 
representing  between  seventy  and  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  milk-pro- 
ducing towns  in  N~ew  England.  The  printed  report  of  this  com- 
mittee states  : 

"  The  number  of  producers  who  kept  a  strictly  accurate  record  of  all  the 
cost  items  was  naturally  small.  During  the  last  five  or  ten  years,  however, 
more  attention  has  been  given  to  the  question  of  the  cost  of  keeping  cows, 
and  the  number  of  producers  who  keep  accurate  records  has  been  rapidly  on 
the  increase.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  shown  that  it  was  within  only  the 
last  seven  to  ten  years  that  serious  consideration  has  been  given  to  an 
analysis  of  the  items  of  cost  in  the  keeping  of  cows. 

"  Taken  over  New  England  generally,  under  varying  conditions  and  with 
varying  degrees  of  efficiency  and  varying  accuracy  as  to  items  of  cost,  the 
following  range  of  figures  represents  fairly  the  evidence  obtained  at  the 
hearings  : 


Producer  Producer 

No.  2  No.  S 

$51  54  $68  00 

18  15  45  00 


5  85  10  00 

37  3  00 

75  ...... 

9  75  20  0<> 

2  00  1  00 
1  00  5  00 

3  00 


50       5  00' 


Total  Cot 

1.     Feed  —  hay,  grain,  ensilage,  pasture. 
2.     Labor         ".                              ... 

it 
Producer 
No.   1 

$49  40 

17  72 

3.     Overhead  charges: 

a.  Interest  on  money  invested  in 
cow       .  . 

3  00 

b.  Insurance  on  cow   
c.  Taxes  on  cow     

45 
2   15 

d.  Depreciation  of  cow 

5  00 

e.  Barn  rent 

2  86 

f  .  Bedding  

2  00 

g.  Keep  of  bull     

2  86 

h.  Incidentals  —  light,       medicine, 
veterinarian,  heating  water  in 
winter    salt    etc             .          .  . 

1  50 

$86  94 

$92  91  $162  00 


43 

Credits 

Value  of  calf $1  00  $11  00  $5  00 

Value  of  manure   5  00  10  00  15  00 


$6  00  $21  00  $20  00 


Net  cost  to  keep  a  cow $80  94  $71  91  $142  00 


(These  figures  show  that  it  costs  No.  3  almost  twice  No.  2  to  keep  a  cow.) 

Variation  in  Production 

Figures  obtained  on  production  varied  from  3,500  to  15,000  Ibs.  per  year. 
In  the  above  three  instances,   the   amount  of   production  per   cow  was   aa 

follows : 

No.   1  No.  2  No.  3 

5,293  Ibs.  6,590  Ibs.  8,000  Ibs. 

The  cost  of  100  Ibs.  of  milk  to  each  was,  therefore: 

$1.5291  $1.0911  $1.775 

Cost  per  quart: 

$0.0332  $0.0237  $0.0385 

The  ttvo  -fundamental  factors  entering  into  the  cost  of  a  quart  of  milk  are 
the  net  cost  of  keeping  a  cow  per  year  and  the  amount  of  milk  the  coic  pro- 
duces  in  a  year. 

1.  Probably  less  than  20  per  cent,  of  these  farmers  have  silos.     Estimates 
on  pasture  varied,  but  the  pastures  vary  to  a  considerable  extent,  depending 
on  whether  they  are  good  for  one,  two,  three  or  four  months.     This  will  vary 
in  the  farms  in  each  locality  according  to  the  condition  of  the  pasture  laud. 

2.  Labor  was   subject  to  wide  variations  —  $15  to  $45  per  year  per  cow. 
In  many  sections,  farmers  stated  that  they  could  not  market  their  labor  in 
winter  in  any  other  way  except  in  the  cai'e  of  cows.     Estimates  of  cost  of 
boarding  a  hired  man  were  from  $7.50  to  $22.50  per  month.     *     *     * 

4.  In  Massachusetts,  Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island,  most  of  the  farmers 
buy  cows  at  $70  to  $110,  milk  them  one  to  four  years,  then  sell  them  for 
beef  at  $20  to  $60,  according  to  the  size,  condition  of  cow  and  market  price 
for  beef.  This  depreciation  of  $20  to  $60  is  divided  over  the  number  of  years 
the  cow  is  kept. 

Very  few  took  into  account  the  depreciation  to  be  figured  over  a  series  of 
years  (five,  eight  or  ten  years),  because  of  sickness,  death,  loss  of  calves, 

bunches  on  knpes,  sore  teats  and  loss  of  one  or  more  quarters  of  the  bag,  etc. 
*     *     * 

6.  One  of  the  widest  variations  was  found  in  the  estimated  value  of  manure, 
from  $30  per  cow  in  greenhouses  and  market  garden  districts  in  Massachusetts, 
Connecticut  and  Rhode  Island,  to  $5  in  other  localities.  There  seems  to  be 
very  little  definite  or  accurate  knowledge  as  to  what  manure  is  really  worth 
to  the  land  for  the  raising  of  crops  or  the  effect  of  certain  kinds  of  bedding 
on  the  quality  of  the  manure  and  on  the  land.  Most  of  the  estimates  were 
guesses  of  $10  to  $15,  which  the  farmer  had  heard  had  been  given  out  by  ex- 
periment stations. 

//  many  farmers  are  depending  on  the  calf  and  manure  for  their  return  for 
the  labor  in  keeping  a  cow,  as  many  stated  ircis  their  usual  method  of  figuring 


44 

(calf  and  manure  offset  the  labor  charge),  then  many  farmers  on  their  esti- 
mates were  proved  to  6e  getting  a  poor  return  for  their  labor. 

It  appeared  that  the  situation  was  further  complicated  by  the  fact  that  pro- 
ducers generally  had  no  accurate  knowledge  of  the  number  of  important  fac- 
tors affecting  the  cost  of  production  on  their  farms. 

1.  This  was  particularly  true  in  regard  to  the  number  of  pounds  of  milk 
per  cow.     While  figures  obtained  by  the  committee  ranged  from  3,500  Ibs.  to 
15,000  Ibs.  per  year,  it  was  clear  that  there  are  many  cows  in  New  England 
producing  under  3,500  Ibs.  per  year. 

It  is  exceedingly  doubtful  if  most  of  the  cows  in  New  England  are  produc- 
ing much  more  than  3,500  to  4,000  Ibs.  per  year. 

The  evidence  demonstrated  that  while  in  many  towns  there  are  from  five 
to  twenty-five  producers  who  have  pure-bred  bulls,  and  some  have  pure-bred 
cows,  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  majority  do  not  have  either;  and  outside  of  the 
cow  test  associations,  a  disappointingly  small  per  cent,  weigh  or  measure, 
although  there  has  been  a  great  increase  in  weighing  in  the  last  three  or  four 
years. 

2.  Comparatively  very  few  farmers  had  taken  any  account  of  incidentals, 
such   as   light,  medicine,   heating  water   in   winter,   veterinarian,   salt,   curry 
combs,  shovels,  etc.     All  of  these  items  are  necessary   and  cost  money,  and 
should  be  reckoned  in  the  cost  ol  keeping  a  cow." 

We  insert  the  foregoing  extracts  from  the  above-mentioned 
report  herein  as  affording  a  basis  of  comparison  with  the  results 
obtained  by  this  Committee.  It  may  be  questioned  whether  the 
method  of  taking  the  costs  set  out  in  this  report  and  which  have 
been  largely  followed  in  the  farm  bureau  work  of  this  State  is  the 
only  or  the  most  exact  method  of  obtaining  the  costs  of  production 
on  the  dairy  farms  in  New  York  State  which  are  practically 
devoted  entirely  to  the  production  of  market  milk.  Dairy  farmers 
in  New  England,  and  especially  in  extensive  parts  of  that  terri- 
tory, still  sell  from  their  farms  for  their  cash  income,  corn,  oats, 
beef,  sheep,  wool,  eggs  and  poultry,  home-made  cheese,  butter,  and 
other  products.  Taken  as  a  whole,  the  hill  farms  of  New  England 
may  safely  be  said  to  require  a  smaller  capital  investment  than 
the  dairy  farms  of  the  State  of  New  York  devoted  entirely  to  the 
industry.  Of  course,  there  are  many  exceptions  to  this  proposi- 
tion. 

It  was  considered  of  sufficient  importance  to  the  Committee 
making  this  examination  to  remark  in  their  report  when  consider- 
ing the  matter  of  labor  cost  that,  "  The  farmers  stated  that  they 
tfould  not  marlcet  their  labor  in  winter  in  any  other  ivay  except  in 
the  care  of  coivs"  The  inference  we  gather  from  this  statement 


45 

is  that  in  these  cost  accountings,  therefore,  the  winter  labor  of  the 
dairy  fanners  was  included  at  a  low  figure,  and  this  low  cost  of 
labor  necessarily  entered  into  the  labor  items  set  out  in  the  report. 
Considered  from  its  economic  side,  this  proposition  is  unsound, 
and  its  unsoundness  is  demonstrated  by  economic  development  in 
this  State.  There  was  a  period  in  our  state  when  farm  labor 
could  not  be  marketed  in  winter  except  at  a  very  low  price.  The 
dairy  farmers  and  the  entire  community  are  now  astonished  to 
discover  that  farm  labor,  both  in  the  summer  and  winter,  need  no 
longer  continue  farm  labor,  but  can  readily  be  marketed  at  a  high 
price  in  the  adjacent  manufacturing  communities.  The  conse- 
quence of  this  development  is  that  sufficient  farm  labor,  either 
in  winter  or  summer,  is  no  longer  available  to  provide  for  the 
care  and  keeping  of  dairy  cows,  except  at  a  high  price. 

The  dairyman  is  compelled,  in  order  to  procure  help,  to  enter 
into  competition  with  the  highly  paid  labor  of  the  factory  towns, 
both  in  winter  and  summer.  The  hired  man  no  longer  works  for 
his  board  through  the  five  winter  months.  He  is  becoming  and 
has  already  become  to  a  considerable  extent,  a  valued  employee 
with  a  substantial  annual  salary.  The  farming  community,  as  a 
whole,  and  every  member  of  this  Legislature  who  is  acquainted 
with  general  farming  conditions  will  readily  agree  with  this  con- 
clusion. The  labor  cost  in  the  above  report  of  Producer  No.  1  at 
$17.72,  and  of  Producer  No.  2  at  $18.50,  must  be  assumed  to 
include  the  daily  charge  of  the  cattle  and  the  stable;  the  milking 
and  delivery  of  the  milk;  the  attention  required  for  breeding  and 
calving;  the  hauling  and  labor  of  horses  therein  for  every  day 
in  the  year.  Take  a  dairy  of  twenty  cows,  would  it  be  possible  to 
contract  for  the  sum  of  $354.40  with  a  competent  person  in  this 
State  during  the  past  four  or  five  years  for  the  doing  of  this  work, 
including  the  housekeeping  and  preparation  of  food  for  the  person 
engaged  therein  ?  Our  average  dairy  farmer  would  heartily  wel- 
come the  opportunity  to  make  such  a  contract.  The  conclusion 
reached  by  the  'Committee,  therefore,  is  that  the  items  of  labor 
cost  in  Producer  No.  1  and  2,  in  the  above  report,  are  at  least  not 
fairly  applicable  to  the  situation  in  the  State  of  New  York  and  do 
not  reflect  prevailing  farm  labor  conditions  in  the  State  of  New 
York  during  several  years  past. 


46 

Average  Production  Per  Cow 

The  conclusion  reached  by  the  New  England  investigation  and 
expressed  in  the  statement,  "  It  is  exceedingly  doubtful  if  most 
of  the  cows  in  New  England  are  producing  much  more  than  3,500 
to  4,000  pounds  per  year,"  is  partially  borne  out  by  the  evidence 
produced  before  this  Committee  and  is  probably  but  little  below 
the  average  in  New  York.  It  is  mentioned  in  this  connection 
because  the  production  of  a  cow  is  an  important  factor  governing 
the  cost  of  production.  This  is  further  borne  out  by  the  statistical 
report  of  the  Federal  Census  of  1910  in  relation  to  milk  produc- 
tion in  the  State  of  New  York,  by  which  it  appears  that  the  aver- 
age production  of  all  the  enumerated  dairy  cows  in  the  State 
of  New  York  approximated  4,000  to  4,500  pounds  of  milk  per 
annum. 

Cost  of  Milk  Production  in  the  State  of  New  York  Prior  to  the 

Year  1916 

The  Department  of  Farm  Management  of  the  New  York  State 
College  of  Agriculture  at  Cornell  University  since  the  year  1911 
has  conducted  a  series  of  investigations  into  the  cost  of  milk  pro- 
duction in  the  State,  During  the  period  from  August  1st,  1911, 
until  July  31,  1913,  it  collected  cost  data  on  174  farms  in  Dela- 
ware county.  Great  care  was  used  in  taking  the  figures  and  they 
were  checked  over  daily  in  order  to  avoid  mistakes  and  to  make 
sure  that  the  records  were  complete.  The  report  of  this  investiga- 
tion is  among  the  exhibits  in  evidence  before  this  Committee. 
Certain  statements  and  schedules  included  therein  are  made  a  part 
hereof  and  contain  both  interesting  and  reliable  data  upon  this 
matter.  Among  other  things,  it  is  said : 

Most  of  the  farms  visited  were  in  the  townships  of  Delhi,  Cortwright, 
Hobart,  Stamford  and  Harpersfield,  Delaware  county.  During  the  summer 
and  fall  of  1912,  complete  records  were  obtained  from  210  farms.  The  same 
farms  were  revisited  in  1913,  but  since  1912  was  an  unfavorable  year  for 
dairymen,  many  of  them  had  become  discouraged.  There  were  21  men,  or  10 
per  cent,  of  the  total  number  visited,  who  had  either  changed  farms  or  gone 
out  of  the  dairy  business,  or  had  done  both.  (The  italics  are  inserted  by  th.? 
Committee.)  The  remaining  174  farms  furnished  complete  records  the  second 
year,  and  therefore  the  records  from  the  same  174  farms  were  used  both 
years. 


47 

Any  farm  that  kept  at  least  12  cows  was  included.  Aside  from  this,  the 
farms  were  not  selected  in  any  way.  They  varied  in  many  respects. 

The  sizes  of  the  farms  varied  from  68  acres  to  538  acres;  the  average  was 
139  acres.  The  smallest  number  of  cows  kept  on  any  of  these  farms  was  12; 
the  largest  number  was  102,  and  the  average  was  30. 

The  capital  invested  in  the  dairy  enterprises  varied  from  $1,826  to  $18,478; 
the  average  was  $5,890. 

The  distance  from  market  varied  from  0.3  mile  to  6.5  miles;  the  average 
was  2.7  miles.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  these  were  typical  dairy  farms 
of  the  region. 

The  county  is  best  adapted  to  the  keeping  of  dairy  cows.  The  steep  hillsides, 
which  constitute  a  large  proportion  of  the  region,  are  suitable  for  grazing  pur- 
poses. At  the  foot  of  nearly  every  hill  there  is  a  spring,  which  furnishes 
abundant  water  for  the  stock.  Dairying  has  been  for  many  years,  and  per- 
haps will  continue  to  be,  the  leading  industry.  According  to  the  census  of 
1910,  there  were  78,073  dairy  cows  in  the  county,  producing  33,004,538  gallons 
of  milk.  These  figures  give  Delaware  county  the  second  place  among  the 
counties  of  New  York  in  number  of  dairy  cows  and  in  the  production  of  inilk. 
h>t.  Lawrence  county,  which  is  much  larger,  leads  with  100,537  cows,  and 
36,484,918  gallons  of  milk.  In  proportion  to  the  number  of  inhabitants,  how- 
ever, Delaware  county  has  more  cows,  and  produces  more  milk,  than  any  other 
county  in  the  State.  For  every  one  hundred  persons  in  Delaware  county, 
there  were  171  dairy  cows. 

The  greater  part  of  the  milk  produced  is  sold  in  New  York  City  in  the  form 
of  milk.  The  common  practice  is  to  sell  this  milk  according  to  the  butter  fat 
content.  The  test  of  the  average  herd  in  this  region  was  4.6  per  cent. 

The  cost  of  feed  is  the  principal  factor  that  enters  into  the  cost  of  main- 
taining an  animal.  In  1912,  there  were  1,952  head  of  young  stock  and  5,303 
COAVS  on  174  farms.  This  would  indicate  that  one  calf  is  raised  each  year  for 
approximately  every  five  cows;  the  average  age  at  which  a  heifer  drops  her 
first  calf  being  determined  as  about  two  years.  It  is  necessary  to  raise  about 
that  proportion  of  young  stock  in  order  to  maintain  the  herd.  Assuming  this 
to  be  true,  any  expense  for  raising  young  stock  is  a  part  of  the  dairy  business 
and  should  be  included  in  finding  the  cost  of  milk  production.  In  this  study 
the  costs  of  keeping  the  young  stock  and  the  bulls  were  not  kept  separate 
from  the  cost  of  keeping  the  mature  cows.  The  feed  used  per  cow  and  the 
labor  required  per  cow  in  all  the  following  tables  are  therefore  the  amount 
used  per  cow  plus  her  proportion  of  the  accompanying  stock. 

All  grain  and  forage  used  by  the  cattle,  whether  raised  or  bought,  was 
figured  at  its  farm  value,  not  at  its  cost  of  production.  The  farm  value  may 
differ  from  the  market  value,  but  whenever  any  feeds  were  bought  and  hauled 
to  the  farm  the  cattle  are  charged  with  the  market  value  of  the  feed,  the  cost 
of  hauling  being  included  under  the  man,  horse  and  equipment  charge.  The 
farms  are  so  heavily  stocked  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  farmers  to  raise  ail 
the  grain  and  all  the  roughage  required. 

There  were  5,318.8  tons  of  grain  fed  to  cattle  on  these  174  farms.  The 
number  of  cows  kept  was  5,308,  so  that  the  average  cow,  together  with  the 
accompanying  stock,  used  a  little  more  than  one  ton  of  grain. 


48 


TABLE  1.     Grain  Raised  and  Fed,  5,308  Cows,  1,078  Heifers,  874  Calves  and 

158  Bulls,   1912. 

Average 

Total 
valuG 

$80 
1,707 
310 
642 


Kind 
Ear  corn  

Quantity 
(tons) 
G  4 

value 
per  tor 

$12  50 

Oats  

51  5 

33   15 

Oats  and  barley  

116 

26  72 

Buckwheat.  .      .                 

...                      18  5 

Q4  70 

88.0 

$31    12 

$2,739 


Grain  Bought  and  Fed 

In  1912  the  dairymen  on  these  farms  bought  98.3  per  cent,  of  the  grain 
fed  to  cattle.  The  average  cost  of  the  grain  was  $31.27  per  ton.  The  kinds, 
quantities  and  value  of  the  different  grains  used  are  given  in  Table  2 : 

TABLE  2.     Grain  Bought  and  Fed,  5,308  Cows,  1,078  Heifers,  874  Calves  and 

158  Bulls,  1912 


Average 

Quantity 

value 

Total 

Kind 

(tons) 

per  ton 

value 

Ajax  

36.0 

$32  97 

$1,187 

Beet  pulp  

183.5 

27  96 

5,130 

Brewers'  grains    

83.6 

30  08 

2,515 

Corn  meal  , 

129.1 

31  79 

4,104 

Cottonseed  meal  

1,040.2 

33  28 

34,619 

Gluten    (continental)    

255.2 

33  62 

8,580 

Gluten    (yellow)    

1,136.1 

32  54 

56,972 

Middlings    (wheat)    

16.0 

30  00 

480 

Middlings    (buckwheat)    

10.0 

29  00 

290 

Molasses  feed   

742  .  1 

27  83 

20,650 

Oil  meal   

12.5 

36  48 

456 

Quaker  oat  feed  

17.0 

25  94 

441 

Wheat  feed    

742.9 

31  31 

23,258 

Calf  meal  , 

5.1 

56  27 

287 

Salt  

43.0 

12  00 

516 

Wheat  bran  

127.4 

29  74 

3,789 

Hominv  

274.3 

31  79 

8,720 

Hammond  dairy  

10.1 

30  00 

303 

Housten  dairy  

6.0 

32  00 

192 

Husted  feed  , 

1.0 

25  00 

25 

3  D's  

5.0 

33  00 

165 

Corn  and  oats   

36.0 

32  00 

1,152 

Oats  

10.0 

30  70 

307 

Ground  corn    

5.0 

30  00 

150 

Alfalfa  meal    

0.5 

30  00 

15 

Kinds  not  itemized  

303.2 

30  55 

9,262 

5,230.8 


$31  27          $163,565 


Forage  (Except  Silage)  Raised  and  Bought 

More  than  99  per  cent,  of  the  forage  that  was  fed  was  produced  on  the 
farm.  The  kinds,  quantities  and  values  of  the  forage  raised  and  bought  are 
given  in  Tables  3  and  4: 


J 


49 


TABLE  3.     Forage  (Except  Silage)  Raised  and  Fed,  5,308  Cows,  1,078  Heifers, 
874  Calves  and  158  Bulls,  1912. 

Quantity 
Kind  (tons) 

Oat  hay 56.5 

Mixed  hay    10.316.5 

Clover  hay   

Alfalfa  hay    

Corn  stover    

Peas  and  oats   

Millet 

Straw.  . 


65.0 

13.0 

598.1 

245.5 

318.8 
269.0 


Average 

'f          value 

Total 

per  ton 

valuo 

$16  19 

$915 

18  57 

191,577 

18  00 

1,170 

19  85 

258 

11  00 

6,579 

17  75 

4,357 

16  84 

5,370 

9  65 

2,595 

11,882.4 


$17  91          $212,821 


TABLE  4.     Forage  {Except  Silage)  Bought  and  Fed,  5,308  Cows,  1,078  Heifers, 
874  Calves   and   158  Bulls.,   1912 


Kind 
Alfalfa  hay 

Quantity 
(tons) 
8  5 

Average 
value 
per  ton 
$23  06 

Total 
value 
$196 

Clover   hay  

83 

21  45 

178 

Mixed  hay    

46  8 

20  68 

968 

Straw. 

7  5 

11  33 

85 

71.1 


$20  07 


$1,427 


Silage 

No  silage  was  bought  or  sold,  all  silage  being  fed  on  the  farms  where  it  was 
grown.  The  average  farm  value  of  clover  and  mixed  hay  in  Delaware  county 
for  the  year  from  August  1,  1911,  to  July  31,  1912,  was  $18.57  per  ton. 
When  hay  is  worth  $18.75  per  ton,  corn  silage  should  be  worth  $6  per  ton. 
In  order  to  avoid  any  possible  criticism  it  was  charged  at  $5.  At  this  price 
the  value  of  the  4,759  tons  fed  was  $23,795.  Pasture  was  figured  as  follows: 
Interest  amounting  to  5  per  cent.,  and  taxes  amounting  to  0.5  per  cent.,  were 
charged  on  the  actual  value  of  the  land  in  pasture.  The  16,054  acres  of  pas- 
ture land  on  these  174  farms  were  valued  at  $311,641,  which  included  such 
added  costs  of  making  and  repairing  fences,  fertilizing,  neseeding,  mowing,  and 
the  like.  The  average  value  per  acre  was  $19.41.  The  annual  cost  of  this 
pasture  in  1912  was  $22,762,  which  was  $4.29  per  cow  and  accompanying 
stock.  Labor  was  divided  into  two  classes  —  human  labor  and  horse  labor. 
Human  labor  included  all  manual  labor  that  was  done  for  the  dairy  enter- 
prise, with  the  exception  of  hauling  the  milk.  It  included  the  time  spent  in 
doing  chores,  such  as  driving  cattle  to  and  from  pasture,  milking,  caring  for 
milk  and  dairy  equipment;  feeding  the  cattle,  cleaning  stables,  and  all  mis- 
cellaneous work  such  as  caring  for  sick  animals,  buying  and  selling  stock, 
hauling  and  mixing  feed,  and  the  like. 

The  time  spent  in  raising  and  harvesting  crops  for  the  cows  was  not 
included,  as  the  feed  was  charged  at  its  farm  value,  not  its  cost  of  produc- 
tion. Time  spent  in  hauling  out  manure  was  not  included,  as  the  manure 
was  credited  at  its  value  in  the  barnyard. 

Horse  labor  included  all  the  time  when  the  horses  were  working  for  the 
cows,  excepting  the  time  required  to  haul  milk,  raise  and  harvest  crops  and 
haul  manure. 


50 

In  order  that  the  labor  charges  might  not  be  considered  excessive,  man 
labor  was  charged  at  fifteen  cents  and  horse  labor  at  twelve  cents  per  hour. 
There  were  no  records  available  to  show  how  much  women  and  child  labor 
cost.  In  this  investigation,  women  and  child  labor  was  valued  at  ten  cents 
per  hour. 

The  average  time  required  to  care  for  a  cow  and  the  accompanying  stock 
in  1912  was  158  human  hours  and  two  horse  hours. 

The  cost  of  hauling  the  milk  in  question  was  $31,338.  Only  the  cost  of  the 
necessary  buildings  for  sheltering  the  cattle  were  charged  to  the  dairy. 

Cost  of  Cattle 

Owing  to  inefficiency  and  death,  it  is  necessary  to  keep  changing  the  cows 
in  a  dairy  herd.  The  animals  that  die  are  almost  a  total  loss,  and  dairy 
cows  sold  for  beef  are  disposed  of  at  a  sacrifice. 

In  herds  where  cows  are  fed  large  quantities  of  concentrated  feeds,  the 
loss  from  depreciation  becomes  an  important  factor  in  the  cost  of  milk  pro- 
duction. 

During  the  year  1911-12  there  were  1,222  cows  sold  from  these  farms  and 
128  cows  that  died.  At  the  end  of  the  year  there  were  on  the  farms  120  cows 
tess  than  at  the  beginning.  (The  rest  of  the  loss  being  made  up  from  the 
growing  young  stock.)  This  would  mean  to  maintain  the  same  number  of 
cows  throughout  the  year  would  necessitate  changing  1,470  cows.  Since  there 
were  on  an  average  5,308  cows,  this  would  indicate  that  the  average  produc- 
tive life  of  a  dairy  cow  was  3.6  years. 

In  order  to  determine  stock  depreciation  in  another  way,  each  farmer  was 
asked  to  give  his  estimate  of  the  average  time  that  a  cow  remained  in  his 
dairy.  The  average  of  these  174  estimates  was  5.8  years.  This  is  perhaps 
a  more  reliable  figure,  as  results  obtained  for  any  one  year  are  influenced  by 
the  conditions  prevailing  during  the  year,  while  estimates  of  this  nature  are 
based  on  the  experience  of  many  years. 

The  cattle  costs  were  therefore  decreased  in  inventory,  plus  interest  on  aver- 
age investment.  In  case  there  was  an  increase  in  inventory,  that  increase  was 
subtracted  from  the  interest  cost.  On  these  farms  there  was  a  gain  in  stock 
of  $7,226,  as  shown  in  the  following  table: 

TABLE  12.     Cost  of   Cattle,    5,308   Cows,    1,078   Heifers,   874   Calves   and    158 

Bulls,  1912. 

Total  value  of  cattle  August  1,  1912 $262,390 

Sales  during  year    32,371 

Total $294,761 

Total  value  of  cattle  August  1,  1911 $259,804 

Purchases  during  year   27,231 

Total 287,035 


Difference    (increase)    $7,726 


Average  investment  in  cattle,  $261,097. 

Interest  on  $261,097  at  5  per  cent $13,055 

Deducting  gain  on  cattle  from  interest 7,726 

Net  cost  .. $5,320 


51 

The  average  value  of  the  dairy  equipment,  cans,  pails,  strainers,  etc.,  for 

these  farms  was  the  sum  of  $8,984,  and  the  depreciation  thereon  averaged  $273 
per  year. 

The  annual  cost  of  this  equipment  to  the  174  farms  was  $2,133.  The 
miscellaneous  costs  are  shown  by  the  following  table: 

TABLE   15.     Miscellaneous  Costs,   5,308   Cows,   1,078  Heifers,   874   Calves  and 

158  Bulls,  1912. 

Insurance  on  cattle $814 

Veterinary  fees  671 

Medicines 797 

Fly  protector 220 

Breeding  fees   73 

Testing  fees   84 

Registration  and  other  fees 38 

Skim  milk  bought  for  calves 1,943 

Ice 1,485 

Grinding  feed    166 

Cutting  straw  5 

Acids.  .                                            ; 3 


$6,299 

Credits 

Credit  was  given  for  value  of  milk  and  butter  used  in  the  house,  value  of 
milk  or  skim  milk  fed  to  stock  other  than  cattle;  value  of  manure  produced; 
receipts  from  hides  and  other  miscellaneous  returns.  All  milk  used  in  the 
homes  was  valued  at  $2  per  hundredweight  and  amounted  to  $7,268.  Skim 
milk  fed  to  hogs,  chickens  and  other  stock  was  valued  at  $300.  Returns  from 
breeding  fees  and  hides  were  fully  credited.  Returns  from  the  sale  of  stock 
were  not  enough  to  pay  for  the  purchases  and  5  per  cent,  on  the  investment. 
The  returns,  other  than  from  milk  sold  in  1912,  are  given  in  Table  16. 

TABLE   16.     Summary  of  Returns  Other  than  Milk   Sold,   5,308    Cows,    1,078 
Heifers,  874  Calves  and  158  Bulls,  1912. 

Butter  used  in  house,  260  pounds  at  30  cents $78 

Milk  used  in  house,  3,634  hundredweight,  at  $2 7,26S 

Milk  and  skim  milk  fed  to  stock  other  than  cattle 30i 

Manure,  47,936  loads,  at  $1 47,936 

Hides 3,925 

Breeding  fees 15 


52' 


SUMMARY  OF  THE  COSTS  OF  PRODUCING  MILK,  1912 
A  summary  of  the  costs  of  producing  milk  in  1912  is  given  in  Table  17: 

TABLE   17.     Summary  of   Costs   of   Producing  Milk,    1912,   5,308    Cows,    1,078 
Heifers,  874  Calves  and  158  Bulls. 


Gross  costs: 
Feed  and  bedding   
Labor 

Total 

$437,951 
119  191 

Percent 
of 
total 
cost 

69.4 
18  9 

Cost  per 
cow  and 
accom- 
panying 
stock 

$82  50 
22  45 

Cost  per 
100  pounds 
of  milk 

$1.8035 
4908 

Hauling  milk    

31,338 

5.0 

5  90 

.1291 

Buildings    .  . 

28,162 

4  5 

5  31 

1160 

Cattle 

5  329 

0  8 

1  00 

0219 

Dairy  equipment        

2,582 

0.4 

49 

.0106 

Miscellaneous  costs  

6,299 

1.0 

1   19 

.0259 

Total  

$630,852 

100.0 

$118  84 

$2.5978 

Returns: 
Returns    excluding  milk  sold. 

59,522 

11  21 

2451 

Net  cost  of  242,830  hun- 
dred weight  of  milk.  . 


$571,330 


$107  63 


$2.3527 


The  feed  and  bedding  cost  was  $82.50  per  cow,  or  69.4  per  cent,  of  the  total 
cost.  The  labor  cost  per  cow,  not  including  milk  hauling,  was  $22.45,  which 
was  18.9  per  cent,  of  all  the  costs.  If  hauling  milk  had  been  included  under 
labor,  the  labor  cost  would  have  been  $28.35  per  cow.  The  cost  of  shelter, 
interest  and  depreciation  on  cattle,  cost  of  dairy  equipment  and  miscellaneous 
expenses  amounted  to  $7.99  per  cow.  The  total  cost  of  keeping  a  cow  in 
Delaware  county  was  $118.84.  The  returns  from  products  other  than  milk 
sold  amounted  to  $107.63  per  cow.  The  net  cost  of  producing  100  pounds  of 
milk  during  1912  was  $2.35,  or  a  little  over  five  cents  a  quart.  The  net  cost 
of  producing  one  pound  of  butter-fat  was  51  cents.  The  average  price  received 
for  this  milk  was  $1.65  per  hundredweight. 

Owing  to  the  high  prices  for  grain  and  the  general  scarcity  of  hay,  the  cost 
of  producing  milk  was  greater  for  the  year  from  August  1,  1911,  to  July  31, 
1912,  than  it  would  have  been  under  normal  conditions.  For  fear  that  tire 
results  obtained  that  year  might  lead  to  a  wrong  conclusion,  it  was  thought 
desirable  to  have  additional  data.  With  this  in  view,  the  same  farms  were 
visited  the  following  year  and  similar  records  were  taken  of  the  dairy  busi- 
ness. The  farms  and  the  management  were  the  same,  but  the  price  of  milk 
had  advanced  eleven  cents  per  hundredweight.  In  general,  the  costs  were 
much  the  same;  the  greatest  difference  was  found  in  the  price  of  the  feeds  and 
in  the  quantities  of  feeds  used.  The  total  value  of  the  grain  raised  and  fed 
during  the  period  1912-13  was  $2,353,  having  an  average  value  of  $30.28  per 
ton.  The  grain  bought  and  fed  had  a  total  value  of  $159,882,  or  an  average 
value  of  $28.57  per  ton.  The  forage,  except  silage,  raised  and  fed  had  a 
total  value  of  $169,993,  or  an  average  value  of  $15.42  per  ton.  The  forage 
bought  was  valued  at  $1,556,  or  an  average  of  $13.67  per  ton.  There  were 
4,166.2  tons  of  silage  fed,  valued  at  $5  per  ton,  amounting  to  the  sum  of 


53 


$20,831.  The  cost  of  pasture  was  $19,203.  Bedding  costs  amounted  to  $3,967. 
Interest  at  5  per  cent,  on  the  average  investment  in  feed  amounted  to  $5,135. 
The  total  summary  of  feeding  and  bedding  costs  for  1912-13  was  $382,920,  as 
compared  with  $437,951  for  the  year  1911-12.  The  cost  of  labor  was  $91,113; 
cost  of  hauling  was  $30,924;  repairs,  interest,  depreciation,  insurance  on 
buildings,  amounted  to  $28,489;  dairy  equipment  cost  $2,016;  miscellaneous 
costs  were  $6,132.  Credit  returns  other  than  milk  sold  were  $71,454. 

SUMMABY   OF    THE    COSTS    OF    PRODUCING    MlLK,    1913 

A  summary  of  the  costs  of  producing  milk  is  given  in  Table  24: 

TABLE  24.     Summary   of  Costs  of  Producing  Milk,   1913,   5,030   Cows,    1,027 
Heifers,  883  Calves  and  141  Bulls. 

Cost  per 
Percent        cow  and 

Gross  costs:  Total 

Feed  and  bedding   $382,920 

Labor 91,113 

Hauling  milk 30,924 

Buildings 28,489 

Dairy  equipment 2,016 

Miscellaneous  costs    6,132 


Returns : 
Returns,  excluding  milk  sold. 


$541,594 
71,454 


of 

accom- 

Cost per 

total 

panying 

100  pounds 

cost 

stock 

of  milk 

70.7 

$76  13 

$1.6548 

16.8 

18  11 

.3937 

5.7 

6.15 

.1336 

5.3 

5.66 

.1231 

0.4 

0.40 

.0087 

1.1 

1.22 

.0265 

100.0 

$107  67 

$2.3404 

14.21 

.3088 

Net  cost  of  231,399  hundred- 
weight  of   milk $470,140 


$93.46 


$2.0316 


In  1913  the  feed  and  bedding  cost  was  $76.13  per  cow,  which  was  70.7  per 
cent,  of  the  total  cost.  The  labor  cost  per  cow,  not  including  that  for  hauling 
the  milk,  amounted  to  $18.11.  It  cost  $6.15  to  haul  the  milk  from  a  cow,  so 
that  the  total  labor  cost  was  $24.26.  The  annual  cost  of  buildings  was  $5.66 
per  cow.  The  miscellaneous  expenses,  including  dairy  equipment  were  $1.62 
per  cow.  The  total  cost  of  keeping  a  cow  in  Delaware  county  in  1913  waa 
$107.67.  Deducting  for  the  receipts  from  hides,  value  of  butter  and  milk  used 
in  the  house,  and  other  returns,  the  cost  of  producing  the  marketed  milk  was 
$93.46.  This  cost  was  $14.17  less  than  the  cost  for  1912.  The  net  cost  of  pro- 
ducing 100  pounds  of  milk  was  $2.03,  or  32  cents  per  hundredweight  less  than 
it  was  in  the  preceding  year.  The  cost  of  milk  was  4.4  cents  per  quart,  or 
44  cents  per  pound  of  butter-fat.  The  average  price  received  per  hundred- 
weight for  milk  on  these  farms  in  1913  was  $1.76.  There  was  an  average  loss 
of  27  cents  on  every  hundredweight  produced. 

Results  in  1912. 

There  was  15  dairy  herds,  or  about  one  herd  in   11,  that  showed  a  profit. 

There  were  46  herds,  or  about  1  in  4,  that  produced  milk  for  $2  or  less  per 
hundredweight. 

At  the  prices  of  feed,  labor  and  use  of  capital  figured,  the  average  cow 
in  Delaware  county  failed  by  $32.14  to  pay  expenses.  To  state  the  results 
in  another  way,  the  average  cow  paid  all  costs  excepting  the  value  of  hay 


54- 

and  forage  that  was  raised  on  the  farm.     For  this  hay  and  forage,  the  cows 
paid  28  per  cent,  of  its  farm  value. 

Results  for  1913 

In  1913,  dairy  conditions  were  more  favorable.  Grain  and  forage  were 
cheaper  and  milk  brought  a  better  price.  This  year,  52  herds,  or  30  per  cent, 
showed  some  profit.  Under  these  favorable  conditions,  the  average  con:  VMS 
kept  at  a  loss  of  $12.50. 

If  the  cows  paid  full  value  for  their  feed,  there  would  remain  but  4  cents 
per  hour  to  pay  for  the  labor.  In  order  to  show  a  profit,  either  feed  or  labor 
must  bie  charged  below  its  value. 

It  is  possible  for  persons  to  live  when  they  sell  hay  to  cows  at  a  lower 
figure  than  its  farm  value,  or  when  they  work  for  lower  wages  than  15  cents 
per  hour,  or  when  they  accept  a  lower  rate  of  interest  than  5  per  cent.  The 
dairymen  in  Delaware  county  are  doing  one  or  more  of  those  things. 

The  money  made  in  growing  hay  and  forage  helps  to  balance  the  loss  in  the 
dairy  industry.  There  is  also  a  saving  in  that  these  men  pay  out  very  little 
money  to  hired  help,  as  dairying  in  this  county  is  a  family  enterprise. 

One  hundred  and  five  of  the  farms  in  question  used  woman  labor.  Eleven 
used  child  labor.  Thirty-three  used  both  woman  and  child  labor.  Twenty-five 
used  man  labor  only.  Either  women  or  children,  and  in  some  cases,  both, 
helped  with  the  dairy  work  on  85.6  per  cent,  of  the  farms  in  Delaware  county. 

The  rates  charged  for  labor  were  15  cents  per  hour  for  man  time  and  10 
cents  per  hour  for  child  or  woman  labor.  When  two  or  more  members  of 
the  family  work,  it  is  possible  to  live  on  a  farm  and  receive  lower  wages  than 
those  given  above. 

Ninety-four  per  cent,  of  these  farms  are  operated  by  owners.  Even  though 
a  high  percentage  of  these  farms  are  mortgaged,  (56  per  cent,  of  the  farms 
in  the  county  operated  by  owners  are  mortgaged)  the  owners  do  not  have  to 
pay  interest  on  the  total  investment  and  in  many  instances  the  farmers  do 
not  pay  any  interest.  Owing  to  these  conditions,  the  average  farmer  by  work- 
ing hard  himself  and  by  getting  unpaid  help  from  his  wife  and  children,  is 
able  to  live  on  the  land.  It  is  believed  that  the  methods  used  by  these  farmers 
are  as  good  as  those  used 'by  the  average  farmer  in  the  State. 

These  cows  are  producing  125  pounds  more  milk  than  the  average  of  the 
State.  The  average  test  of  the  milk  was  1.6  per  cent,  above  the  legal  standard. 

When  the  average  dairyman  that  gives  better  than  the  average  in  both  quan- 
tity and  quality  of  milk  loses  from  $13  to  $32  per  cow,  there  is  something 
wrong.  It  is  believed  that  the  farmer  does  not  receive  enough  for  his  milk. 

Resulting  Decrease  in  Con~s 

In  1911,  there  were  5,251  cows  on  these  174  farms.  In  1912,  there  were 
5,131  cows  on  the  same  farms,  and  in  1913,  the  number  had  been  reduced  to 
4,924. 

It  was  found  that  production  increased  as  the  value  of  the  feed  used  in- 
creased, the  highest  production  being  in  the  herds  that  used  the  greatest 
value  of  feed.  W7hile  there  was  increased  production  with  each  increased  in- 
vestment in  feed,  the  value  of  the  increase  was  not  enough  to  pay  for  the  cost 
ef  the  feed.  The  cheapest  cost  of  production  and  consequently  the  greatest 
profits  were  found  in  the  herds  that  utilized  pasture.  The  more  expensive  the 


55 

winter  ration,  the  narrower  was  the  margin  of  profit.  Only  one  man  in  six- 
teen who  gave  over  $85  worth  of  winter  feed  produced  milk  for  as  little  as 
$2  per  100  pounds.  The  cost  of  producing  milk  was  less  and  the  profit  of 
the  cow  was  greater  in  the  herds  in  which  the  test  of  the  milk  was  low.  Milk 
testing  4.4  per  cent,  of  butter-fat,  or  less,  cost  $1.90  per  hundredweight  to 
produce,  and  milk  testing  4.9  per  cent,  of  butter-fat  or  more  cost  $2.19  per 
hundredweight.  Since  the  milk  was  usually  sold  on  a  butter-fat  basis,  the 
milk  that  tested  high  in  butter-fat  brought  more  money  than  the  milk  that 
tested  low,  but  it  did  not  command  enough  more  to  make  up  for  the  increased 
cost.  In  1912,  the  average  production  per  cow  was  4,644  pounds;  in  1913,  the 
average  production  was  4,695  pounds.  There  was  19  herds  in  which  the 
average  production  was  3,500  pounds  or  less,  and  9  herds  in  which  the  pro- 
duction was  over  6,500  pounds.  In  1912,  in  the  herds  where  the  average  pro- 
duction was  3,149  pounds,  the  cost  per  hundredweight  for  the  milk  was  $3.12, 
and  the  loss  per  cow  was  $46.  In  the  Irerds  with  an  average  production  of 
4,057  pounds  per  cow,  the  loss  was  $41. 

In  order  to  produce  milk  at  a  profit,  it  required  an  average  production  of 
7,219  pounds  per  cow.  Under  average  Delaware  county  conditions  a  cow 
should  produce  from  6,000  to  7,000  pounds  of  milk  in  order  to  show  a  profit. 

Production  Costs  from  Other  States 

New  Hampshire.  Experiment  Station  bulletin  giving  results  of  the  Lynde- 
boro  Cow  Test  Association  gives  the  cost  of  producing  100  pounds  of  milk  at 
$1.93. 

Massachusetts.  Experiment  Station  bulletin  145  gives  complete  figures  in 
the  quantities,  kinds  and  values  of  the  feed  used  and  the  amount  of  milk 
produced  by  the  station  herd  for  fifteen  years.  The  cost  of  producing  100 
pounds  milk  from  cows  that  average  a  production  of  6,036  pounds  was  $2.42. 

Connecticut.  The  cost  of  producing  milk  for  five  years  in  the  herd  of  the 
Connecticut  Agricultural  Experiment  Station,  as  given  in  bulletin  73  of  that 
institution,  is  as  follows:  "The  average  production  per  cow  was  6,379  pounds 
and  the  cost  per  100  pounds  was  $2.12." 

New  Jersey.  The  1909  report  of  the  Experiment  Station  gives  the  cost  of 
producing  100  pounds  of  milk  from  cows  Avith  an  average  production  of  8,561 
pounds  at  $1.94. 

XORTHERX    ClIEMUXG     Cow    TESTING    ASSOCIATION    FlGUEES. 
THREE  YEAR  AVERAGES,  1911-13 

The  members  of  the  Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Associa- 
tion, most  of  whom  are  valley  farmers,  received  during  the  period 
covered  by  the  following  table  an  average  price  of  3.6  cents  per 
quart  for  their  milk.  In  making  this  table,  hay  was  valued  at 
$10  per  ton,  ensilage  at  $4  per  ton ;  pasturage  at  $1.20  per  month, 
and  grain  at  actual  cost. 


56 


Feed  and  Production  Records 
Averages  of  records  from  278  cows  from  the  books  of  the  Northern  Che- 


Yield  per 
4,000  or 
4,001   to 
5,001  to 
6,001   to 
7,001   to 
8,001   to 
Over  9,0( 

Yield  per 
4,000  or 
4,001   to 
5,001    to 
6,001  to 
7,001  to 
8,001   to 
Over  9,0 

Pounds  of     Pounds  of  Average  test 
cow,  pounds               No.  of  cows               milk         butter  fat     percentage 
less           16                3,457                   140                   4.0 

5  000     .  .  . 

28 

4,605 
5,439 
6,659 
7,493 
8,563 
9,836 

155 
218 
249 
266 
297 
330 

3.4 
4.0 
3.7 
3.5 
3.5 
3.4 

6000 

38 

7  000 

64 

8000 

67 

9  000 

34 

)0 

31 

•  cow,  poum 
less 

Value  of       C 
Is                milk       r< 

$62 

lost  of 
:>ughagie 

$31 
34 
35 
34 
34 
36 
34 

Cost  of 
grain 
$12 
18 
21 
24 
28 
33 
37 

Value  of 
milk  above 
Cost  of      cost  of 
feed           feed 
$43               $19 
52                 38 
56                 42 
58                 56 
62                 67 
69                 83 
71               100 

5  000 

90 

6,000  

98 

7,000  

114 

8,000  

129 

9  000 

152 

00      

171 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  above  table  is  intended  only  to  show 
the  value  of  milk  above  feed  costs.  The  feeds  themselves  are  placed  at  a  very 
low  figure.  If  we  deduct  from  these  net  returns  the  cost  of  shelter,  interest, 
depreciation  on  cattle,  cost  of  dairy  equipment  and  miscellaneous  expenses, 
it  is  evident  that  but  a  very  small  labor  and  capital  return  will  remain  in 
the  case  of  the  cow  with  the  average  production.  A  survey  by  the  Farm 
Bureau  of  Chemung  county,  comprising  237  hill  farms  with  six  or  more  cows, 
shows  average  receipts  per  cow  as  follows:  On  110  farms,  $37  per  cow;  66 
farms,  $62  per  cow;  45  farms,  $87  per  cow;  16  farms,  $119  per  cow.  115 
valley  farms  in  the  same  county,  with  six  or  more  cows  showed  the  following 
gross  returns:  15  farms,  $42  per  cow;  21  farms,  $63  per  cow;  27  farms,  $87 
per  cow;  32  farms,  $118  per  cow. 

AGRICULTURAL  SCHOOL  EXPERIENCE 

The  New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  at  St.  Lawrence 
University,  with  an  accurate  system  of  bookkeeping  on  its  com- 
mercial farm  with  a  herd  averaging  over  7,000  pounds  of  milk 
per  cow  and  crediting  the  calves  and  manure  at  high  value,  suc- 
ceeded in  practically  balancing  its  debit  and  credit  account,  as 
shown  by  the  following  statement : 

The  following  table  speaks  for  itself.  The  monthly  sales  with  Ibs.  of  milk 
and  price  per  lb.  are  record  id  anl  a7so  all  the  expanses  incident  to  the  fad- 
ing, maintaining  and  caring  lor  a  herd  of  cows.  The  values  for  «nilk  are  the 
prices  received  from  actual  sales. 


o 

.fi 
a 

o> 

£ 


57 

COST  OF  PRODUCING  MILK 

Herd,   20   Grade  Holsteins  and  Ayrshires.     Fiscal   Year,  June   1st,  1911,   to 

May  31st,  1912. 

Herd,  Dr. 

Pasture,  21  head  at  $7.00 $147  00 

Rent  of  bull 10  00 

Soiling  feed   at  cost 126  92 

Ensilage,  82^  tons  at  $6 493  50 

Hay,   10^  tons  at  $15 159  37 

Straw,  1 1  tons  at  $5 55  00 

Milking,  drawing  milk  and  care  of  cows 530  51 

Grain,   13   1/6  tons 482  27 

Ice 30  00 

Miscellaneous  expense 12  34 

Depreciation  herd 100  00 

Rental   of   barn . 60  00 

Interest  on  investment 72  00 


$2,214  91 

Herd,  Cr. 

June,  1911,  16,937  Ibs.  milk  at  $1  ...............................  $169  37 

July,  1911,  16,920  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.10  ............................  186  11 

Aug.,  1911,  15,827  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.30  ............................  205  74 

Sept.,  1911,  11,816  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.35  ............................  159  51 

Oct.,  1911,  9,836  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.60  ..............................  157  36 

Nov.,  1911,  8,533  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.80  .............................  153  59 

Dec.,  1911,  8,705  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.80  .............................  156  69 

Jan.,   1912,  5,959  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.70  .............................  101   10 

Feb.,  1912,  3,046  Ibs.  milk  at  $2.00  ..............................  60  92 

Mar.,    1912,   10,110  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.60  ..........................  161  76 

Apr.,   1912,  16,269  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.38i4  ..........................  224  91 

May,  1912,  18,748  Ibs.  milk  at  $1.38i4  ...........................  259  19 

Value  of  calves  sold  ...........................................  25  38 

Manure  .....................................................  220  00 


$2,241  63 

Total  number  pounds  milk  ...................  143,206  Ibs.  65,991  qts. 

Average  number  pounds  milk  per  cow  ........  7,160  Ibs. 

Average  selling  price  per  cwt  ................  $1  .3997  .03037  per  qt 

Cost  to  produce  milk  per  cwt  .................        1  .5466  .0335     per  qt 

If  the  production  of  this  herd  was  brought  down  to-  an  average 
of  5,000  pounds,  the  account  would  have  shown  a  loss  of  over 
$525.  The  Committee  would  also  call  attention  to  the  item  of 
depreciation  of  herd,  $100,  contained  in  this  statement  which  is 
probably  an  arbitrary  bookkeeping  entry;  also  the  item  of  mis- 
cellaneous expense,  $12.34.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  agri- 
cultural school  has  at  its  service  a  competent  veterinarian  and  mis- 
cellaneous dairy  equipment,  the  cost  and  expense  of  which  perhaps 
do  not  fully  enter  into  this  account.  Some  of  the  cows  in  this 
dairy  produce  from  8,000  to  10,000  pounds  of  milk  each.  It 


seems  doubtful  that  $100  per  year  is  an  adequate  allowance  for 
depreciation  of  such  a  herd  through  a  period  of  five  years.  The 
average  return  for  milk  from  this  herd  is  something  over  $100  per 
cow.  In  considering  this  return,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
average  return  is  fairly  reflected  by  the  evidence  which  shows 
that  the  average  returns  from  38  Cattaraugus  county  farms  in 
1915  were  as  follows:  13  farms  showed  average  return,  per  cow, 
of  $47;  15  farms  showed  average  return,  per  cow,  of  $64;  10 
farms  showed  average  return,  per  cow,  of  $93,  as  shown  by  the 
following  table: 

EFFECTS  OF  MILK  RECEIPTS  PEE  Cow  ON  LABOB  INCOME 
(38  Cattaraugus  Farms  with  Six  or  More  Cows.) 

Milk  receipts,  per  cow  No.  of     Total  No.        Labor 

Range  Average  cows       of  acres         income 

Under  $55   $47  16  200  $185 

$55  to  $75    64  18  215  345 

Over  $75    93  18  129  816 


No.  farms 

with  labor  Grain  pur-  No.  farms 

incomes     chased  per  having 

Range                                                 No.  farms     over  $100         farm  silos 

Under   $55    13                   1             $272  1 

$55  to  $75    15                    5                334  3 

Over  $75    10                   7               439  6 


The  costs  of  the  agricultural  school  may  also  be  somewhat  influ- 
enced by  the  fact  that  production  ranged  from  18,000  pounds  of 
milk  for  the  month  of  May  to  9,800  pounds  in  October,  and  to 
3,046  pounds  in  February. 

A  STUDY  OF  FEED  AND  LABOR  COSTS  PER  Cow 

Dr.  Carl  W.  Larson  of  Columbia  University  has  made  a  careful 
study  into  the  economic  factors  controlling  the  cost  of  feed  and 
labor  per  cow,  per  annum,  which  has  been  published  by  the  Colum- 
bit  University  Press,  and  which  Dr.  Larson  has  kindly  placed  at 
the  disposal  of  the  Committee.  The  purpose  of  the  study  is  to 
.ascertain  what  it  costs  to  produce  milk  under  present  prices  and 
conditions  and  the  author  has  availed  himself  of  all  surveys  and 
investigations  at  hand  to  date  and  applied  to  them  scientific 


59 

methods  of  study.     His  conclusions,  based  upon   the  year-round 
production,  follow : 

l,i>80  pounds  of  hay  at  80  cents  per  100  Ibs $13  44 

7,000  pounds  of  silage  at  15  cents  per  100  Ibs 10  5ft 

1,350  pounds  of  corn  at  $1  per  100  Ibs 13  5tt 

!»()0  pounds  of  distiller's  grains  at  $1.50  per  100  Ibs 13  50 

f»00  pounds  of  'bran  at  $1.05  per  100  Ibs 9  45 

!>00  pounds  of  oats  at  $1.10  per  100  Ibs 9  90 

Pasture  for  season  at  $5 5  09 

Total  cost  of  feed  per  year $75  29 

These  figures  are  assumed  for  a  herd  of  Guernsey  cows  which 
average  1,000  pounds  in  weight,  that  give  on  an  average  8,500 
pounds  of  milk  per  year,  and  that  the  milk  contains  5  per  cent  of 
butter-fat,  and  supply  the  requisite  amount  of  proteins  and  energy- 
producing  foods.  And  it  should  also  be  stated  that  the  figures 
are  only  given  to  illustrate  the  formula  deduced  for  determining 
the  food  quantities  required,  but  in  that  view  they  are  important. 
The  evidence  before  this  Committee  would  show  that  during  the 
year  1916,  grain  foods  commanded  a  higher  price  than  the  price 
units  used  by  Dr.  Larson.  Under  the  conditions  that  prevail  on 
the  ordinary  dairy  farm,  silage  foods  cannot  be  produced  in  the 
State  of  New  York  at  15  cents  per  100  Ibs.,  as  the  evidence  before 
this  Committee  abundantly  shows.  On  the  labor  item,  Dr.  Larson 
concludes  as  follows : 

The  cost  of  labor  required  to  care  for  a  cow  a  year  is  given  by  various 
authorities  as  follows:  Truman  (Connecticut  Experiment  Station),  $33.60; 
Minkler  (New  Jersey  Experiment  Station),  one  man  for  twelve  cows  at  $1.50 
per  day,  or  $40  per  cow,  per  year.  Rassmussen  (New  Hampshire  Experiment 
Station),  $22.33. 

On  specialized  dairy  farms,  each  man  takes  care  of  fifteen  cows,  or  $36  per 
cow,  per  year. 

Hopper  and  Robertson  (New  York  Experiment  Station),  estimate  the  cost 
at  $23.12  per  cow,  per  year;  or  154.5  hours  a  year,  or  25.4  minutes  per  cow 
per  day. 

Thompson  (Delaware  County  Bulletin)  states  that  on  dairies  studied,  155 
hours  of  labor  were  required  to  care  for  each  cow  and  accompanying  stock  in 
herds  of  20  or  less,  and  107  hours  in  herds  of  more  than  40  cows.  The  cost 
was  $18.11  per  year. 

Johnson  and  Ford  state  the  average  cost  of  labor  on  certain  Missouri  farms 
was  $24.60  per  year,  per  cow. 

Professor  Warren  concludes  that  in  well-managed  dairies  150  hours  are 
required  per  year,  per  cow,  and  that  in  a  study  of  labor  cost  it  is  necessary 
to  decide  the  kind  of  milk  being  produced  and  adds,  "  to  increase  the  score  of 


60 

the  dairy  from  42  to  approximately  70  points,  there  may  be  in  fifteen  cow 
dairies  an  added  expense  of  5  cents  per  cow,  per  day,  for  labor." 

Dr.  Larson  concludes,  "  It  is  therefore  a  fair  and  practical  procedure  to  cal- 
culate the  cost  of  labor  on  a  basis  of  20  cows  per  man,  or  to  precalculate  labor 
cost  by  dividing  the  cost  of  one  dairyman  per  year  by  20  to  get  the  cost  per 
cow.  At  a  price  of  $45  per  month  without  board,  the  cost  per  cow  is  $27. 
There  are  not  available  any  accurate  records  covering  long  periods  where 
actual  time  records  show  a  decrease  in  cost  due  to  the  use  of  milking 
machines." 

Cost  of  Building 

The  cost  per  cow  for  a  barn  varies  in  good  dairies  from  $25  to  $100,  or 
more,  per  head.  A  50  cow  barn  of  modern  construction  can  be  built  for  about 
$80  per  head.  This  is  for  a  good  barn  with  proper  ventilation  system  and 
modern  sanitary  arrangement  for  a  specialized  dairy  capable  of  meeting  the 
requirements  for  the  production  of  a  high  grade  of  milk.  A  summary  of  the 
cost  of  building  under  these  conditions  would  be  as  follows: 

Interest  $80  at  5  per  cent $4  00 

Insurance  $80  at  3  per  cent 24 

Taxes  $40  at  2  per  cent 80 

Depreciation  $80  at  4  per  cent 3  20 


Total  unit  cost  of  housing $8  24 


The  Cost  of  Cattle 

To  build  up  permanent  dairies,  it  is  necessary  to  raise  the  cows,  especially 
if  the  high-producing  healthy  herd  is  to  be  maintained.  With  the  data  avail- 
able, we  find  the  feed  cost  to  raise  a  heifer  to  two  years  of  age  is  $47.51, 
which  varies  with  conditions.  They  are  used  in  order  that  the  same  basis 
of  prices  may  carry  throughout  the  study.  The  labor  cost  for  two  years 
would  be  $9.45  per  head.  The  other  expenses,  including  interest,  buildings, 
equipment,  bedding,  loss  by  death,  and  miscellaneous  expense,  amount  to  $16.67 
for  the  two  years.  This  makes  the  total  cost  of  raising  the  heifers,  including 
feed,  labor  and  overhead,  $73.63.  These  are  the  figures  of  Messrs.  Bennett 
and  Cooper  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture.  A  credit  of  $12 
for  manure  for  the  two  years,  makes  the  net  cost  for  a  two-year-old  heifer 
$65.63.  Mr.  Truman  figured  the  total  cost  of  a  two-year-old  heifer  to  be 
$70,  but  he  added  $4  as  the  initial  value  of  the  animal,  while  Lindsey  (Con- 
necticut Experiment  Station)  found  the  cost  under  conditions  of  higher  cost 
of  feeds  and  with  an  initial  charge  of  $4,  to  be  $74.24. 

That  the  heifer  coming  into  the  herd  at  a  cost  of  $65,  it  must  next  be 
determined  how  long  she  will  likely  be  in  the  herd  as  a  profitable  producer 
of  milk,  and  how  much  she  will  be  worth  at  the  end  of  her  period  of  profit- 
ableness as  a  milk  producer.  The  amount  of  depreciation  per  year  will  de- 
pend upon  the  number  of  years  the  cow  is  profitable  and  is  the  difference 
between  the  cost  of  the  cow  at  entry  into  the  herd  and  her  sale  price  as  beef. 
*  *  *  On  the  average,  the  economic  life  of  a  dairy  cow  is  much  shorter 
than  is  generally  believed  and  is  a  large  item  of  expense,  especially  where  high 
cost  animals  are  kept.  The  average  life,  according  to  Rassmussen,  is  about 
six  years.  In  herds  in  Delaware  county,  changes  in  cows  indicated  the  aver- 
age productive  life  was  only  3.6  years,  while  the  opinions  of  174  farmers 


61 

estimated  it  at  5.8  years.  Studies  in  farm  management  by  the  United  States 
Department  of  Agriculture  showed  that  the  dairy  cows  of  Chester  county, 
Pennsylvania,  remained  in  a  herd  4.34  years,  while  in  Lenawee  county,  Michi- 
gan, they  remained  4.52  years.  A  study  of  52  Cow-Testing  Association 
records  reporting  the  ages'  of  13,856  cows  shows  an  average  economic  life  of 
4  17/20  years.  Dr.  Larson  concludes,  "  This  furnishes  a  figure  which  should 
be  very  near  to  the  expected,  and  if  the  cost  of  cows  is  computed  on  the  basis 
of  depreciation,  which  replaces  them  every  five  years,  the  herd  will  be  main- 
tained." 

The  total  annual  cost  of  cows  is,  therefore,  as  follows: 

Depreciation $5  00 

Insurance,  $65   at   3  per  cent 31 

Taxes,  $32.50  at  2  .per  cent 65 

Interest,  $65  at  5  per  cent 3  25 

Total  cost  per  cow,  per  year $9  21 


COST  OF  BEDDING 

From  the  same  studies,  and  in  the  same  manner  Dr.  Larson 
computes  the  cost  of  bedding  at  $3.25  per  cow,  per  year;  cost  of 
sire,  $3.51  per  year;  miscellaneous  expenses,  as  follows: 

Ice,  1  ton  at  $1 $1  00 

Wood  and  coal    75 

Utensils 1  00 

Supplies 1  00 

Veterinary  services  and  tester    2  50 

Hauling  and  transportation    18  00 

Total   miscellaneous  expense    $24  25 


VALUE  OF  CALVES  AND  MANURE 

Professor  Larson  concludes  $3  per  year  for  each  cow  in  the 
herd  is  a  fair  credit  for  the  calf.  Under  conditions  where  cows  are 
well  supplied  with  concentrated  feeds  and  where  the  manure  is 
properly  cared  for,  a  cow  of  1,000  pounds  weight  will  furnish  $20 
worth  of  added  fertility  per  year.  The  practice  in  England,  which 
is  covered  by  a  law  affecting  landlord  and  tenant,  gives  a  tenant 
credit  for  all  manure  resulting  from  purchased  feeds  to  stock  on 
the  basis  of  three-quarters  of  the  total  value  of  the  phosphoric  acid 
and  potash  in  the  feed  allowed  for  all  unused  manure.  A  credit 
of  TO  per  cent  of  the  total  value  of  nitrogen  is  allowed  when  the 
stock  is  fed  on  pasture,  and  only  50  per  cent  when  it  is  fed  in  the 


62 

barnyard.  When  one  crop  lias  been  grown  after  application  of  the 
manure,  a  credit  of  one-half  the  above  amounts  is  allowed.  There 
are  tables  in  the  English  publications  referred  to  above  giving  the 
amounts  of  nitrogen,  phosphoric  acid  and  potash  voided  from  the 
various  grains  fed  to  dairy  cows.  Given  the  quantities  of  fe^d 
consumed  and  the  prices  for  the  elements  needed  on  a  particular 
farm,  the  real  value  of  manure  under  particular  conditions  of  sale 
and  feeding  can  be  definitely  ascertained. 

APPLICATION  AND  USE  OF  FORMULA 

The  costs  and  credits  incident  to  milk  production  may  now  be  summarized. 
Under  the  conditions  stated  for  each  item  which  includes  the  particular  size 
and  kind  of  cow  producing  8,500  pounds  of  4  per  cent  milk,  with  feeds  at 
stated  prices,  with  a  system  of  management  given,  and  with  a  good  barn 
well  equipped  for  the  production  of  high-grade  milk,  cost  records  will  show 
the  following  as  actual  costs  in  the  production  of  milk: 

Feed $75  29 

Labor  . 27  00 

Buildings 8  24 

Cattle K 9  21 

Bedding ; 3  25 

Sire :.; 3  51 

Miscellaneous  expenses 24  25 


$150  75 


Calves $3  00 


Net  cost  per  cow,  per  year $127  75 

The  average  standard  of  production  of  these  cows  is  assumed  at  8,500 
pounds  per  year,  which  was  also  the  average  production  of  the  985  Guernsey 
cows  used  in  the  Wisconsin  test,  on  which  the  data  in  this  study  are  based. 
Figuring  2.15  pounds  to  the  quart,  the  production  is  3,441  quarts.  Thus,  the 
cost  of  production  per  quart  is  about  3^  cents. 

Prices  Paid 

The  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company  of  New  York,  recently  an- 
nounced its  price  schedule  for  milk  as  follows: 

1915 


May 

1  40 

June  

1  40 

July.  ... 

...     1  50 

\ugust 

1  65 

September.  . 

1  75 

*  NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. —  These  prices  were  probably  for  4.5  milk  and  subject 
to  deductions  of  three  cents  per  point  below  4.5. 


63 


1916 

April $1  70 

-May 1  40 

June 1  40 

July 1  60 

August 1  75 

September 1  80 


It  should  be  further  pointed  out  that  the  price  for  feeds  in  the  foregoing 
tables  are  somewhat  lower  than  prevail  at  the  present  time.  At  prevailing 
prices  for  feed  (March,  1916),  the  costs  would  be  increased  to  $90.49,  and 
the  total  cost  to  $143.36,  and  the  profit  per  cow  may  be  determined  as  follows : 

Sale  price  of  8,500  Ibs.  of  milk $170  00 

Cost  of  production  of  8,500  Ibs.  milk 142  95 

Profit  per  cow   $27  05 


For  the  standard  herein,  however,  unusually  high  producing  cows 
were  selected.  The  average  production  of  the  cows  of  the  United  States 
is  only  about  3,000  pounds.  Animals  of  this  sort  present  a  very  different 
outlook  to  the  business.  We  may  assume  that  cows  of  this  standard  are 
used  to  supply  milk  to  the  same  market.  By  referring  to  the  preceding 
chapter,  we  find  the  food  for  maintenance  would  be  the  same  and  for  3,000 
pounds  of  milk  is  as  follows: 

1,680  pounds  of  hay  at  80  cents  per  100  Ibs $13  44 

7,000  pounds  of  silage  at  15  cents  per  100  Ibs 10  50 

450  pounds  of  corn  at  $1  per  100  Ibs 4  50 

300  pounds  of  distiller's   grains   at   $1.50 4  50 

300  pounds  of  bran  at  $1.50  per  100  Ibs 3  15 

300  pounds  of  oats  at  $1.10  per  100  Ibs 3  30 

Pasture  for  season  at  $5 5  00 


Total  cost  of  feed  for  the  year $44  39 


This  would  be  a  ration  adequate  to  supply  the  needs  of  the  animal. 

The  cost  for  feed,  therefore,  would  be  $30.90  less  per  year.  The  cost  of 
labor,  buildings,  bedding,  and  miscellaneous  expenses  would  be  the  same, 
while  the  cost  of  sires  and  cows  would  be  decreased  only  by  the  initial  cost 
of  the  latter,  which  would  only  decrease  the  cost  per  unit  cow  by  a  few  cents. 
The  cow  would  cost  as  much  to  raise,  but  if  purchased,  could  be  obtained  for 
lower  price.  The  total  annual  cost  then  to  keep  cows  of  this  kind  would 
be  $97.26.  The  milk  at  $2  per  hundred  pounds  would  bring  $60,  which  would 
make  a  loss  of  $37.26  per  cow,  per  year.  This  is  what  may  be  expected  at 
present  prices  of  feed  and  labor  from  cows  that  produce  no  more  than  the 
average  cow  of  the  United  States,  when  a  dairyman  attempts  to  produce 
»ilk  of  good  grade  in  good  barns,  using  full  grain  rations  and  producing  year- 
round  feeding.  *  *  An  application  of  the  formula  warrants  the  following 
•onclusions : 


64: 

1.  Under  present  prices  of  feed  and  labor,  a  herd  of  high-producing  cows 
will,  when  properly  managed,  return  5  per  cent  interest  on  the  capital  in- 
vested in  a  good  plant,  and  an  additional  5  per  cent  for  services  of  the  man- 
ager, not  included  in  regular  labor  charge. 

(NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE:  This  is  the  8,500  pound  cow  whose  produc- 
tion is  insignificant  in  comparison  with  the  needs  of  our  inhabi- 
tants. ) 

2.  The  average  cow  of  the  United  States  does  not  produce  enough  milk 
to  pay  the  cost  of  production  when  managed  under  the  same  conditions  and 
equipped  to  produce  high-grade  milk.1 

(XoTE  BY  COMMITTEE:      At  present  prices.) 

3.  Where   the   herd   uses    feeds   that    cannot    be    marketed,   or    a    cheaper 
system  of  management  is  used,  and  where  the  cows   are  housed  in  cheaper 
buildings  and  given  less  care,  they  may  pay  the  cost  of  production  of  milk. 

4.  Under    some   conditions,    summer    dairying   would   be    more    profitable 
than  the  all-year  practice. 

5.  It  does  not  pay  to  use  intensive  methods  or  winter  grain  feeding  with 
low-producing  cows. 

6.  The  value  of  pasture  for  dairy  cows  has  been  under-estimated. 

The  conclusions  of  Professor  Larson  above  given  are  probably 
as  complete  and  thorough  an  examination  and  study  of  the  printed 
data  available  upon  those  subjects  to  this  date  as  can  well  be  made. 
The  conclusion  which  is  of  greatest  importance  to  this  work  and 
to  the  dairymen  generally  of  this  State  in  that  relating  to  the  3,000 
pound  cow,  which,  with  milk  selling  at  $2  per  hundrediv  eight, 
would  make  a  loss  of  $37.26  per  cow,  per  year.  The  fact  is,  how- 
ever, as  the  milk  prices  hereinafter  returned  will  show,  that  for  a 
series  of  years  prior  to  1916,  the  average  dairyman  received  little 
more  than  3  cents  per  quart  .  If,  therefore,  we  take  Dr.  Larson's 
figures  for  the  cost  of  food,  housing,  investment  and  labor  per  cow 
per  annum  of  $97.26,  and  assume  that  cost  is  applied  to  a  4,500 
pound  cow,  which  milk  would  have  the  average  selling  price  per 
hundred  weight  that  the  Commercial  Farm  of  the  School  of  Agri- 
culture in  connection  with  St.  Lawrence  University  received  in 
1912,  to  wit :  $1.40  per  hundredweight,  the  milk  of  this  cow  would 
then  bring  $63,  showing  a  net  loss  of  $34,26  per  cow,  per  annum. 

WHARTON  VALLEY  SURVEY 

A  survey  of  98  farms  in  Otsego  county  in  the  year  1914  was 
made  by  the  farm  management  demonstration  agents  of  the  United 
States  Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  State  College  of  Agri- 


65 

culture,  with  the  assistance  of  Messrs.  Seoville,  Clark  and  Burdge, 
and  Mr.  Floyd  S.  Barlow,  manager  of  the  Otsego  County  Farm 
Bureau.  The  results  of  this  survey  have  been  published  and  it  is 
known  as  the  "  Wharton  Valley  Survey." 

It  was  taken  in  the  Wharton  Valley  beginning  at  the  village  of 
Pittsfield  and  extending  two  miles  north  of  West  Exeter  in  the 
town  of  Exeter.  The  records  include  practically  nine-tenths  of 
the  farms  in  this  area,  along  with  a  few  that  lie  immediately  back 
and  might  be  classified  as  hill  farms.  There  is  a  State  road  in 
the  valley  connecting  Edmeston  with  West  Winfield.  It  is  an 
old  established  dairy  section  with  an  abundant  supply  of  milk 
receiving  stations,  and  it  is  in  a  region  where  cattle  have  been  long 
and  carefully  bred.  Twenty-two  of  the  farms  kept  pure  bred 
Holstein  cattle,  of  which  an  average  of  17  on  each  farm  was  regis- 
tered pure  breds. 

The  average  receipts  per  cow  from  the  sale  of  milk  and  its  prod- 
ucts on  these  98  farms  in  1914,  was  $82.  The  average  receipt 
per  cattle  unit  from  milk,  and  cattle  increase  was  $84.  On  21  of 
the  farms,  the  receipts  per  cow  averaged  $51.  Twenty-two  of  the 
farms,  the  receipts  per  cow  averaged  $67.  Twenty-nine  of  the 
farms  the  receipts  per  cow  averaged  $85.  Twenty-six  of  the  farms, 
average  receipts  per  cow  were  $102. 

Applying  Dr.  Larson's  formula  to  the  average  returns  per  cow 
to  the  Wharton  Valley  survey,  would  establish  that  each  one  of 
the  98  dairy  farms  lost  money  upon  their  cows.  In  other  words, 
the  department  in  making  this  survey  have  assumed  labor  costs  at 
a  less  sum  than  Larson  assumes  to  be  sound  political  economy; 
thereby  the  survey  shows  in  some  cases  a  fair  labor  return.  On 
8  of  these  farms,  the  labor  return  was  less  than  nothing.  Thirty- 
three  of  them  showed  labor  incomes  from  $100  to  $500.  Thirty- 
three  of  them  showed  labor  incomes,  according  to  the  cost  units 
adopted,  of  $501  to  $1,000.  Ten  showed  labor  incomes  of  $1,000 
to  $1,500.  Ten  showed  labor  incomes  of  $1,500  to  $2,000.  The 
report  concludes :  "About  one-half  of  the  men  in  Groups  1  and 
2  had  better  sell  their  farms,  put  the  money  out  at  interest,  and 
hire  out." 

3 


66 

DUTCHESS  COUNTY  SURVEY 

A  detailed  study  was  made  of  a  year's  business  of  66  Dutchess 
county  farms  in  1914  by  the  same  organizations  in  co-operation 
with  various  other  agencies,  under  the  direction  of  F.  H.  Lacy, 
agent  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  at 
Poughkeepsie.  From  that  survey  it  appears  that  12  out  of  66 
farms  made  labor  incomes  of  $1,000,  or  over.  Twenty  made  labor 
incomes  of  $400  to  $1,000;  20  made  from  $1  to  $400;  14  failed 
to  make  expenses  and  interest.  The  average  of  all  labor  incomes 
was  $544  on  the  66  farms.  On  25  of  these  farms,  the  receipts 
per  cattle  unit  from  the  sale  of  milk  averaged  $59.  On  25  of 
the  farms  receipts  per  cattle  unit  from  the  sale  of  milk  averaged 
$90.  On  16  of  the  farms,  the  receipts  per  cattle  unit  from  the 
sale  of  milk  averaged  $97,  and  this  survey  concludes:  "  While 
the  milk  receipts  are  slightly  higher  on  the  exclusively  dairy  f  arms, 
the  total  receipts  are  $562  less  than  01  the  farms  deriving  only 
from  60  to  79  per  cent,  of  the  income  from  milk."  The  method 
of  calculating  labor  income  on  this  survey  is  shown  in  the  follow- 
ing table  : 

TABLE  8  —  Method  of  Calculating  Labor  Income. 
Averages  from  66  Dutehess  County  Farms,  1914. 

Receipts 
Crop  sales  ............................................. 

Milk  sales  .............................................        1>560 

Other   stock  receipts  .................................... 

Miscellaneous  receipts    .................................. 

Increase  in  feed  inventory  ...............................  70 

Total  receipts  .....................  ............... 

Expenses 
Hired  labor    ........................................... 

Board  furnished  hired  help  .............................. 

Family  labor    .......................................... 

Purchased   hay    ........................................ 

Purchased  feed    ........................................ 

Seeds  .......................  .......................... 

Fertilizer  .............................................  ^ 

Other   expenses    ........................................ 

Total    expenses    .................................... 

Farm  income    ...................................... 

Capital 


Value  of  farm,  186  acres  n 

Live-stock  .................................................... 

Machinery  and  tools  ....  ......  /  .................................. 


67 

Feed    and    supplies $273 

Cash  to  run  farm 254 


Total  capital    $14,375 

Interest  on  capital  at  five  per  cent $719 

Labor  income  $544 

The  factor  sheet  on  these  farms  is  as  follows: 

TABLE  10  — Factor  Sheet 

Average  of  66  Duchess  County  Farms,  1914 
Labor  income   $544 

Size 

Total  capital    $14,375 

Total  acres    192 

Acres    in    crops    86 

Number   of  cows 16 

Number  of  men  on  year  basis,  including  operator 2.4 

Average  number  of  work  horses- 4.5 

Cow  Production 

Milk  and  its  products  sold,  per  cow $98 

Receipts  per  cattle  unit 86 

Crop  Yields 

Acres  of  corn  for  grain 7 

Yield,   bushels   per   acre    35 

Acres  of   salage  corn    6 

Yield,  tons  per  acre    10 

Acres  of  potatoes .8 

Vield,  bushels  per  acre   129 

Acres  of  oats   8 

Yield,  bushels  per  acre  of  oats 36 

Acres    of    hay    47 

Yield,  tons  per  acre  of  hay 1 

Per   cent,    crop   yield 100 

Sources  of  Income 

Crops $357 

Milk    and    its   products 1,560 

Other    cattle    receipts 327 

Miscellaneous  receipts 121 

Per  cent  of  total  receipts  derived  from  milk  and  its  products .57 

CHATTMONT  BAY  AREA,  JEFFERSON  COUNTY  FARM  BUREAU  SURVEY 

The  area  covered  in  this  survey  includes  nearly  every  farm  on 
all  the  roads  from  a  point  about  one  mile  west  of  the  village  of 
Limerick  from  the  town  line  of  Cape  Vincent  in  the  Fox  Creek 
district,  and  from  the  shore  of  Chaumont  Bay  to  a  line  running 
about  one  and  one-half  miles  north  and  parallel  to  the  New  York 
Central  Railroad.  Transportation  and  shipping  facilities  are 
good,  except  on  the  unimproved  clay  roads  in  wet  season.  On 


68 

the  whole,  the  farms  in  the  district  are  prosperous  and  their  farm 
operations  are  rewarded  with  profits  above  the  average  of  the  farms 
in  the  county.  The  survey  covers  95  farms.  The  conditions  are 
generally  applicable  to  a  considerable  number  of  Jefferson  county. 
Labor  income  is  the  pay  that  the  farmer  receives  for  his  work. 
Deducting  both  interest  and  expenses  from  the  farm  receipts, 
leaves  the  farmer's1  labor  income: 

TABLE  I  —  Method  of  Figuring  Labor  Income 
Averages  of  95  Jefferson  'County  Farms  near  Chaumont  Bay  for  the  Year  1914 

Receipts 

Hay,  45.9  tons  at  $15.80 $725 

Oats,  300  bushels  at  53  cents 160 

Other  crops    29 

Milk 579 

Cattle  (increase  and  sales  above  purchases) 244 

Other   stock    124 

Miscellaneous 

Increase  in  feed  inventory 55 

Total.  .  $1,971 


Hired  labor  

Board,  hired  labor 

Family  labor    65 

Grain,  feeds   42 

Seeds 35 

Taxes 94 

All  else 204 

Total.  .  606 


Income  from  capital  and  operator's  labor $1,365 

Capital 

Value  of  farm,  173  acres $10,353 

Value   of  live-stock 1,773 

Value  of  machinery 

Value  of  feed  and  supplies 

Cash  to  run   farm 152 

Total  capital   $13,305 

Interest  oil  capital  at  five  per  cent $665 

Labor  income  

Variations  in  Labor  Incomes 

Five  of  the  95  farmers  failed  to  make  a  labor  income.    That  is,  the  interest 
and  the  expenses  exceeded  the  receipts.     The  lowest  labor  income  was   a 

minus  $325. 

TABLE  II  —  Variation  in  Labor  Incomes. 

5  farms  made  labor  incomes  of  less  than  nothing 

24  farms  made  labor  incomes  from       $1  to     $400 
29  farms-  made  labor  incomes  from  $401  to      $800 

25  farms  made  labor  incomes  from  $801  to  $1,200 
12  farms  made  labor  incomes  over  $1,200 


69 

Almost  one-third  of  the  farmers  made  less  than  hired  men's  wages  or 
below  $400,  a  little  more  than  a  third  over  $800,  and  aibout  a  tenth  above 
$1,200.  The  highest  income  for  labor  was  $2,547. 

It  appears  by  the  following  table  that  the  average  receipts  per 
cow  on  these  95  farms  was  $61 : 

TABLE  III  —  Factor  Sheet 

Average  of  95  Farms,  near  Chaumont  Bay,  for  1914 
Labor  income   $700 

(1)    Size 

Number    of    acres    in    crops 129 

Number   of   acres   in   farm 173 

Number  of  acre  sin  pastures 38 

Total  capital    $13,305 

Number  of  cows 9% 

Number  of  workers  (on  year  basis) iy2 

Average  number  of  work  horses 4 

(2)    Crop  Yields 

Stilage   corn,  number  of  acres 4 

ton    per    acre .- 7 

Oats,  numbers  of  acres 32 

bushels   per  acre .  . .  .• 33 

Hay,  number  of  acres 89 

ton  per  acre .85 

Crop  yield  compared  with  acreage    100% 

(3)   Coio  Receipts 

Milk  and  it  product  sold,  per  cow $61 

Pounds  of  milk  sold,  per  cow 4,600 

(4)  Efficiency  in  Use  of  Labor  and  Economy  in  Expense 

Number  of  crop  acres  per  man 86 

Number  of  crop  acres  per  horse 32 

Number  of  crop  acres  per  $100  invested  in  machinery 17 

Expense  per  animal,  acre  unit $31 

Interest  expense  per  animal,  acre  unit 

Labor  expense  per  animal,  acre  unit 13 

By  reference  to  Table  I  of  the  Chaumont  Survey,  it  appears 
that  the  labor  costs  average  on  these  farms,  as  computed  by  the 
survey  is  $231.  This  labor  return  is  not  sufficient  to  keep  the 
laborers,  both  men,  women  and  children  on  the  farms.  This  is 
shown  by  the  result.  The  hired  help,  the  young  men  and  women 
and  the  farm-wives,  not  getting  a  sufficient  labor  return  in  the 
dairy  industry,  instinctively  abandon  the  farm  and  become  con- 
sumers instead  of  producers.  Dr.  Larson's  analysis  of  the  actual 
economic  labor  cost  and  his  formula  for  labor  cost,  if  applied  to  the 
Jefferson  County  Survey,  would  show  a  much  higher  economic 
cost  than  the  $231  average  hired  labor,  board  and  family  labor  al- 
lowed on  these  95  farms. 


70 

M.  E.  CHUBBUCK,  Farm  Bureau  Agent  of  Chemung  county, 
called  as  a  witness  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  There  have  been  taken  in  this  county,  since  1912,  about  one  thousand  farm 
management  records..  I  have  tabulated  these  records,  not  using  those  taken 
in  1915  and  1916.  The  records  of  those  two  years  are  of  selected  farms  and 
the  results  from  them  would  be  better  than  the  average,  but  we  have  averaged 
458  hill  farms  and  185  valley  farms  in  Chemung  county  for  the  years  1911, 
1912  and  1913,  and  on  those  farms  we  have  worked  out  what  the  farmer 
had  left  as  pay  for  his  work  after  the  expenses  had  been  deducted  from  the 
receipts,  and  five  per  cent  interest  on  his  capital.  We  call  the  balance,  labor 
income.  These  are  not  selected  farms,  but  taken  as  they  come.  I  have  made 
this  computation  as  accurate  and  true  as  shown  by  the  Farm  Bureau  records. 

EXHIBIT  12 

AVERAGE  FARMING  CONDITIONS  AND  COST  OF  KEEPING  A  Cow  IN   CHEMUNG 

COUNTY. 

The  best  figures  available  to  the  Chemung  County  Farm  Bureau  on  the 
average  returns  from  dairy  farming  in  Chemung  county  are  from  the  farm 
management  records  taken  for  the  years  1911,  1912,  1913,  1914  and  1915.  In 
the  following  statistics,  however,  records  for  1914  and  1915  are  not  included 
for  the  reason  that  these  records  are  of  selected  farms  and  profits  are  larger 
than  to  the  average  of  the  region. 

Chemung  county  is  divided  into  two  agricultural  sections,  the  valley  of 
the  Chemung  river  and  its  tributaries,  and  the  hill  region.  Conditions  in 
the  valley  regions  are  better  and  profits  from  farming  are  large.  The  principal 
reasons  for  this  difference  are  primarily  better  average  soils,  the  sale  of  a 
large  portion  of  the. milk  produced  in  Elmira  at  retail  prices  or  prices  better 
than  the  wholesale  New  York  prices,  and  a  system  of  farming  which  is  on  the 
average  better  balanced  than  the  hill  region. 

The  farming  conditions  in  the  hill  region  may  be  judged  from  the  following 
table: 

Average  of  458  Hill  Farms  for  1911,  1912  and  1913 
Capital $5,461 


Gross  income    $1,090 


Income  from  capital  and  operator's  labor 
Interest  on  capital  at  five  per  cent 


Labor  income   $277 

Average  number  cows 7.5 

Receipts  per  cow $56 


The  capital  invested  on  the  average  hill  farm  in  Chemung  county  is  $5,461. 
This  represents  the  investment  in  land,  buildings,  livestock,  machinery,  and 
feed,  and  cash  to  run  the  farm.  The  total  average  receipts  are  $1,090.  This 
is  the  income  from  the  products  sold  from  the  farm  and  any  increase  in  the 
value  of  stock,  grain  or  other  supplies.  The  expenses  for  the  year  are 


These  include  the  regular  cash  outlay  together  with  the  value  of  board 
furnished  hired  help,  decrease  in  inventory  of  stock  and  the  estimated  value 
of  such  work  as  was  done  by  members  of  the  family,  not  including  the 
operator's  own  time.  The  receipts  minus  the  expenses  are  $550.  This  differ- 
ence represents  what  the  farmer  received  for  his  labor  and  what  the  capital 
invested  in  the  business  earned.  A  common  rate  of  interest  on  farm  mortgages 
is  five  per  cent.  At  this  rate  the  interest  on  the  average  farm  capital 
amounts  to  $273.  This  interest  subtracted  from  the  net  income  of  $550 
leaves  $277  as  the  farmers  labor  income.  This  amount  is  comparable  to 
wages  paid  a  hired  man  when  house,  garden,  milk  and  firewood  are  furnished. 
It  should  not  be  compared  to  city  wages.  Investigations  tend  to  show  that 
the  portion  of  the  farmer's  living  furnished  by  the  farm  is  often  of  as  much 
or  greater  value  than  $277,  the  average  labor  income  on  458  hill  farms. 

The  average  receipts  per  cow  in  the  hill  region  for  the  farms  of  which 
records  have  been  taken,  exclusive  of  the  milk  and  butter  consumed  on  the 
farm,  were  $56. 

The  averages  for  the  valley  region  for  the  years  1911,  1912  and  1913  are 
as  follows: 

Average  of  115  Valley  Farms 
Capital $9,749 


Gross  income    $1,975 

Expenses 882 

Income  from  capital  and  operator's"  labor $1,093 


Interest  on  capital  at  five  per  cent 486 

Labor  income    $607 


Average  number  of  cows 9 

Receipts   per   cow $83 


The  percentage  of  farms  making  certain  labor  incomes  is  shown  in  the 
following  table. 

Variation  in  Labor  Income  in  Hill  and  Valley  Regions 

Percentage 

Number  of  Percentage  of  Number  of  of  total 

Labor  income                           valley  farms  total  number  hill  farms  number 

Less  than  $200-   10  5.4  49  8.7 

$200-  to  0    16  8.6  55  12.0 

$1  to  $200    27  14.6  125  27.3 

$201   to  $400    27  14.6  115  25.1 

$401  to  $600    25  13.5  52  11.4 

$601  to  $800    21  11.5  24  5.2 

$801  to  $1,000   15  8.1  23  50 

$1,001   to  $1,500    30  16.2  14  31 

$1,501  to  $2,000    8  4.3  3  .7 

Over  $2,000    8  4.3  7  1.5 

About  half  the  hill  farmers  made  labor  incomes  less  than  $200.  Not  quite 
one-third  of  the  valley  farmers  were  in  this  group.  About  one-fourth  of  the 
valley  farmers  made  over  $1,000  and  only  one  in  twenty  of  the  hill  farmers 
made  as  much. 


72 

Cost  of  Keeping  a  Coio 

With  the  object  of  determining  the  cost  of  caring  for  a  cow,  the  following 
data  was  obtained  from  the  valley  and  hill  farms  keeping  over  six  cows. 
Six  was  made  the  minimum  for  the  reason  that  a  farm  with  less  than  six 
cows  would  be  apt  to  depend  for  its  principal  income  on  some  other  source 
than  dairying.  The  accuracy  of  the  tables  used  depends  on  the  method  of 
determining  the  cost  of  keeping  an  average  animal  unit.  Animal  unit  is 
determined  in  the  following  manner: 

One  cow,  bull,  steer  or  horse  equals  one  animal  unit; 

Two  calves,  heifers,  or  colts  equal  one  animal  unit; 

Seven  sheep  equal  one  animal  unit;; 

Fourteen  lambs  equal  one  animal  unit; 

Five  hogs  equal  one  animal  unit; 

Ten  pigs   equal  one  animal  unit; 

One  hundred  chickens  equal  one  animal  unit. 

From  the  total  amount  of  feed  produced  on  the  farm  was  deducted  that 
part  sold  or  carried  over  to  the  following  year.  The  balance  must  have  been 
fed  on  the  farm.  To  this  was  added  the  feed  purchased.  The  price  allowed 
for  such  feed  was  figured  at  the  value  in  the  barn,  based  on  cost  accounts 
that  were  the  average  for  several  years,  and  on  opinions  of  farmers.  The 
figures  used  are  given  below: 

Corn : 

Grain $       66  per  bu. 

Silage 4  12  per  ton 

Fodder 3  00  per  ton 

Wheat 92  per  bu. 

Rye 68  per  bu. 

Oats 46  per  bu. 

Buckwheat 77  per  bu. 

Hay 11  38  per  ton 

Straw,  estimated  at  10  tons  per  farm 5  00  per  ton 

The  above  measures  for  computing  value  of  feed  consumed  by  stock  are 
those  used  by  Cornell  University  and  are  taken  from  the  average  of  a  large 
number  of  cost  accounts  kept  by  the  Farm  Management  Department  of  the 
University.  They  are  the  most  accurate  measures  available. 

In  the  following  table  the  farms  are  grouped  by  receipts  per  cow: 

Cost  of  Keeping  an  Animal  Unit 

Value  of  milk 

Number  and  Milk  and  butter      a  bove  cost 

situation      Receipts  Value  of        receipts  of  feed  Labor 

of  farms.       per  cow.  total  feed.       per  cow.  per  cow.          Income 

237  hill  farms: 

$50  and  less  $45  $37  $  8-  $138 

$51  to  $75  51  62  11  325 

$76  to  $100  60  87  27  496 

Over  $100  66  119  53  924 

115  valley  farms: 

$50  and  less  49  42  7-  269 

$51  to  $75  55  63  8  270 

$76  to  $100  68  87  19-  747- 

$101  to  $125  71  110  39  1,038 

Over  $125  76  140  64  2,209 


73 


The  averages  for  the  hill  and  valley  regions  are  given  below. 
No.  Cost  of  Feed       Milk  and  Butter       Profit  over  Average 

farms.  per  animal  unit.    Receipts  per  cow.     Cost  of  Feed.      Number  Cows. 

Hill  Farms 
237  $47  $62  $15  11 


115 


$61 


Valley  Farms 

$88 


$27 


12.7 


According  to  computations  made  by  the  animal  unit  system,  which  we  have 
every  reason  to  believe  is  correct,  the  cost  of  feed  for  one  animal  unit  or 
cow  in  the  hill  region  is  $47  and  the  milk  or  butter  receipts  per  cow  $62, 
leaving  a  profit  of  $15  over  the  cost  of  feed. 

Milk  investigations  in  other  regions  tend  to  show  that  the  cost  of  feed  is 
about  70  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  of  keeping  a  cow.  Other  charges  are  for 
labor,  milk  hauling,  depreciation,  interest  on  buildings,  dairy  equipment,  and 
miscellaneous  charges.  If  this  $47  then  represents  70  per  cent  of  keeping 
a  cow,  the  total  cost  on  this  basis  is  $67.  If  this  assumption  is  correct,  the 
average  cow  in  the  hill  region  is  kept  at  a  loss  of  $5  per  cow,  when  sales  of 
milk  and  butter  alone  are  considered. 

An  interesting  statement  of  results  is  furnished  the  Committee 
by  George  M.  Welles  and  Son  of  Ohemung  county,  the  figures 
being  for  a  herd  of  thoroughbreds  with  an  average  production  of 
over  9,000  pounds  for  two  years. 

EXHIBIT   13 
COST  OF  PRODUCING  MILK 

For  the  past  two  years  our  herd  has  consisted  of  twenty  cows  that  have 
milked  for  two  years  and  whose  records  have  been  kept  by  the  Chemung 
Valley  Cow  Testing  Association. 

1914-5  1915-6  Average 

1.  Years  milk  by  herd 163,148  Ibs.  198,864  Ibs.  181,001  Ibs. 

2.  Average    milk    per    cow 8,157  Ibs.  9,943  Ibs.  9,045  Ibs. 

3.  Price   per   cwt $1.69  $1.55  $1.62 

4.  Total  receipts    2,759.00  3,101.00  2,930.00 

5.  Receipts   per   cow    137.95  155.05  146.50 

6.  Hay  consumed  per  cow 1,852  Ibs.  1,840  Ibs.  1,846  Ibs. 

7.  Value  at   $14  per  ton 12.96  12.88  12.92 

8.  Pasture  6%  mo.  at  $2 13.00  13.00  13.00 

9.  Ensilage   fed    7,722  Ibs.  8,075  Ibs.  7,898  Ibs. 

10.  Worth  at  $4  per  ton 15.44  16.15  15.79 

11.  Mixed  grain  ration  fed 2,463  Ibs.  2,215  Ibs.  2,339  Ibs. 

12.  Yearly  depreciation  (see 

note) 15.00                      15.00  15.00 

13.  Cost  of  grain  fed  each  cow.        36.18  32.77  34.47 

14.  Barn  investment  per  cow 100.00 

15.  Depreciation  barn,  5  per  cent;  interest  5  per  cent.  .  .  10.00 

16.  Investment  in  each  cow  $200;  interest  at  5  per  cent.  .  10.00 

17.  One  ton  bedding  per  cow 8.00 

18.  Insurance  on  cattle  per  cow 50 

19.  Veterinary   fees    1.00 

20.  Man  labor  per  cow  (15  days'  time) 20.00 

21.  Horse  labor   per  cow    (2   days'   time) 2.00 


74 

NOTE. — As  the  average  life  of  a  cow  is  7  or  8  years  milking  and  2  growing 
she  will  depreciate  about  10  per  cent,  but  should  still  be  worth  $50  for  beef, 
so  a  $200  cow  depreciates  $150  in  ten  years,  or  $15  per  year,  as  above. 

COST  OF  PRODUCING  MILK  —  SUMMARY 
Receipts  Per  Cow 

Value  of  milk  per  cow,  9,045  Ibs.  at  $1.62  per  cwt $146  50 

Value  of  17j4  tons  manure  at  $2 35  00 

Value  of  calf  when  5  days  old 5  00 


Total  receipts  per  cow $186  50 


Expenses  Per  Cow 

Hay,  1,846  Ibs.  at  $14  per  ton $  12  92 

Pasture,  6^  months  at  $2 13  00 

Ensilage,  7,898  Ibs.  at  $4  per  ton 15  79 

Grain,  2,339  Ibs.  at  $1.47  per  cwt 34  47 

Housing   (Fig.  15) 10  00 

Depreciation    (Fig.    12)     15  00 

Interest  on  cow    (Fig.  16) 10  00 

Bedding  1  ton  at  $8 8  00 

Insurance   (Fig.  18)    50 

Veterinary   fees    (Fig.    19) 1  00 

Man  labor    (Fig.   20) 20  00 

Horse  labor    (Fig.  21) 2  00 

Bull  service     2  00 

Total  expenses    (barring  accidents   and  disease) $144  68 


Profits $  41  82 

BUT!  Remember  these  figures  are  for  cows  which  average  nearly  twice 
that  of  the  general  run  of  cattle  in  Chemung  county.  We  believe  that  if  it 
were  not  for  the  fact  that  the  farmers  feed  their  home  grown  produce  without 
regarding  it  a  salable  commodity  at  the  market  price  and  that  dairying 
yields  a  regular  monthly  income,  that  many  now  engaged  in  it  would  quit. 
We  further  believe  that  without  the  added  income  from  pure  bred  calves  sold 
that  there  would  be  a  very  close  margin  for  profits  from  even  these  cows  at  the 
present  prices  of  milk,  especially  when  it  is  true  that  the  greater  the  milk- 
ing ability  of  a  cow  the  more  susceptible  she  is  to  accidents,  sickness  and 
disease. 

It  might  be  interesting  to  know  what  data  is  used  in  this  state- 
ment to  reach  the  conclusion  that  the  average  productive  life  of 
a  dairy  cow  is  seven  or  eight  years.  It  is  interesting  to  compare 
this  with  Dr.  Larson's  limit  of  five  years.  If  Dr.  Larson's  figures 
are)  sound,  the  depreciation  in  the  Seven  Pines  herd  would  be 
$30  per  year  instead  of  $15  per  animal  —  an  increase  of  $15. 
There  is  not  included  in  the  expenses,  per  cow,  the  following 
items,  which  are  computed  by  Dr.  Larson,  as  follows: 


75 


Ice,   1   ton  at  $1 $  1  00 

Wood  and  coal   75 

Utensils,  interest  and  depreciation 1  00 

Supplies,  salt,  medicines,  etc 1  00 

Veterinary   service   and   tester 2  50 

Hauling  and  transportation 18  00 

Total  miscellaneous  expense $24  25 


Deducting  the  $1  veterinary  service  above,  gives  us  $23.25. 
Applying  Dr.  Larson's  formula  to  this  statement,  we  would  have 
the  following  increased  charges  per  cow: 

On  depreciation    $15  00 

Difference  on  calf    2  00 

Difference  in  labor  item 5  00 

Miscellaneous   expense    23  25 

Total  .  $45  25 


Total  expenses,  per  cow,  $189.93,  or  a  net  loss  of  $3.43  per  cow, 
and  this  after  crediting  the  manure  at  $15  per  year  over  the 
economic  value  as  computed  by  Dr.  Larson.  Deducting  that  excess 
allowance  of  $15,  the  net  loss  per  cow  would  be  $18.43  per  year. 

The  Committee  is  not  contending  for  the  acceptance  of  either 
Dr.  Larson's  proposition  or  the  figures  above  given,  which  are 
largely  made  up  from  the  records  of  the  Cow  Testing  Association, 
but  merely  calls  attention  to  them  for  the  purpose  of  permitting  a 
comparison  of  the  conclusions  reached  by  various  parties  studying 
the  question.  Cost  and  production  accounts  on  eight  herds  in 
Tioga  county  were  submitted  to  the  Committee,  as  follows : 

HEBD  No.  1  —  30  Cows 

Expenses 

Interest  on  $2,500  at  5  per  cent $125  00 

Bull  service 60  50 

Bedding 80  00 

Hauling  cost 300  00 

Labor,  milking  and  care 1,088  00 

Equipment  costs 47  90 

Building  costs 95  00 

Miscellaneous  costs 42  50 

Feed  .  1,840  00 


Total $3,678  90 


76 

Receipts 

Increase  inventory    $20  00 

Milk  sales 3,000  00 

Cattle 655  00 


Total $3,675  00 


Net  loss $  3  90 


Pounds  of  milk  produced 204,000 

If  these  figures  are  correct,  this  dairy  had  an  average  produc- 
tion of  6,800  pounds  per  cow.  The  lack  of  study  of  the  factors 
involved  in  ascertaining  costs  is  clearly  indicated.  For  instance, 
the  unit,  of  labor  cost  was  $36  per  cow.  The  value  of  food-stuffs 
was  $61.33  per  cow,  which  is  low  according  to  Dr.  Larson's  for- 
mula for  cows  with  such  large  production.  The  equipment  costs 
are  about  $1.50  per  cow;  building  cost  about  $3  per  cow;  mis- 
cellaneous charges,  including  hauling,  less  than  $12  per  cow,  as 
against  $24.25  computed  by  Dr.  Larson.  No  credit  is  given  for 
manure. 

Herd  No.  2  of  this  survey  consisted  of  17  cows,  and  the  fol- 
lowing figures  are  presented: 

Expenses 

Interest  on  $4,090  (herd)  at  5  per  cent $204  50 

Bull  service     4  50 

Bedding 156  00 

Hauling 100  10 

Labor 788  20 

Equipment  costs    4  66 

Building  costs   246  00 

Miscellaneous 130  00 

Feed  cost 2,320  00 


Total $3,953  96 


Receipts 

Increase  inventory    $410  00 

Milk  sale 2,014  00 

Cattle  sales 216  00 


Total  receipts $2,640  00 

Net  loss.  ..  •    $1,313  96 


Apparently  this  milk  averaged  $1.68  per  hundredweight.  The 
feed  cost  exceeded  $130  per  cow.  The  labor  cost  exceeded  $46 
per  cow.  These  figures  are  interesting  as  showing  the  necessity 


77 

of  accurate  knowledge  of  cost  accounting  and  a  study  of  the  sub- 
ject by  those  interested.  They  may  be  well  compared  with  Herd 
No.  3  in  the  same  survey,  consisting  of  22  cows,  as  to  which  the 
following  statement  was  made  to  the  Committee : 


Interest  on  $2,500  at  5  per  cent $125  00 

Bull  service 12  10 

Bedding 80  00 

Hauling 100  45 

Labor 648  00 

Equipment  costs    3  18 

Buildings   costs    116  00 

Miscellaneous 34  00 

Feed  cost 1,431  52 


Total $2,550  25 


Receipts 

Increase  in  inventory    $700  00 

Milk   sales    ' 3,257  34 

Cattle  sales    .  454  00 


Total $4,411  34 

Gain $1,861  09 


An  examination  of  these  items  establishes  that  very  different 
cost  factors  were  used  in  the  two  herds.  It  is  very  doubtful  if 
Herd  No.  2  made  a  net  loss  of  $1,313.96,  and  it  is  equally  doubt- 
ful that  Herd  No.  3  made  a  net  gain  of  $1,861.09.  This  dairy 
produced  186,369  pounds  of  milk,  apparently  —  nearly  8,500 
pounds  per  cow.  Nevertheless,  it  should  be  borne  in  mind  that 
these  are  high-producing  bred  cows  in  all  probability,  and  some 
single  registered  or  pedigreed  young  stock  may  have  been  sold  at 
a  price  sufficient  to  make  a  very  large  profit,  Such  experiences 
are,  of  course,  not  infrequent.  The  following  statement  is  given 
the  Committee  as  to  Herd  No.  4  in  Tioga  county,  consisting  of 
22  cows: 

Expenses 

Interest  on  $2,048  at  5  per  cent $102  40 

Bull   service   44  00 

Bedding 108  00 

Hauling 401  50 

Labor 709  00 

Equipment  cost  2  25 

Building  costs  379  00 

Miscellaneous   costs    21  00 

Feed   cost    1,900  00 


Total  expenses  $3,667  15 


78 

Receipts 

Increase  inventory  $375  QO 

Milk  sales,  151,671  pounds  of  milk 2,552  10 

Cattle  sales 426  00 


Total $3,353  10 


Loss '. $314  05 

HERD  No.  7  —  10  Cows 

Expenses 

Interest $37  90 

Bull 34  00 

Bedding 49  00 

Hauling 72  60 

Labor 394  00 

Equipment 8  24 

Building 140  00 

Miscellaneous 18  50 

Feed 948  00 

Decrease  in  inventory 133  00 


Total $1,835  24 


Receipts 

Milk  returns $699  36 

Cattle  sold   .  176  00 


Total  receipts    $875  36 

Net   loss    .  $959  88 


HEBD  No.  8  —  10  Cows 

Expenses 

Interest $49  40 

Bull 38  50 

Bedding 30  00 

Hauling 284  70 

Labor 485  50 

Equipment 13  50 

Building 58  75 

Miscellaneous 76  00 

Feed  .                         655  00 


Total  expense 

Receipts 

Increase  in  inventory 

Milk  sales  893  40 

Net  cattle  sales 210  50 


Total  receipts    _ 

Net  loss $462  45 

THOMAS  GAHAGAN,  a  dairy ?nan  of  Hawleytown,  nine  miles  from 
Binghamton,  in  Broome  county,  called  before  the  Committee, 
testified : 


79 

I  sell  my  milk  to  the  Cloverdale  Dairy  Company  of  Binghamton.     I  have 

a  dairy  of  sixteen  cows;  could  not  tell  the  total  production  or  average  pro- 
duction of  the  dairy  for  1915.    My  receipts  were  as  follows: 

Increase  in  inventory  value $196  00 

Stock   sale    165  00 

Milk  sale 1,182  82 

Milk  used  in  the  house 25  43 


Total $1,569  25 

Expenses 

Feed  bought   $240  85 

Stock  purchased    55  00 

Oats  purchased 13  00 

Thirty-five  tons  of  hay,  at  $12 420  00 

Six  tons  of  millet,  at  $12 72  00 

Three  tons  of  oats  and  peas,  at  $12 36  00 

Pasture 93  00 

Bedding 18  00 

Medicines 2  00 

Utensils 3  85 

Hauling  milk   86  04 

Hauling  feed,  etc 91  25 

Fences 30  00 


Total $1,160  99 

Balance 408  26 


Out  of  this  $408.26  I  have  to  make  the  interest  on  my  investment  in  farm, 
utensils,  dairy  and  equipment.  The  farm  consists  of  150  acres.  We  have  no 
market  crops  except  the  milk.  I  have  a  family  of  nine;  all  live  at  this  home; 
the  eldest  is  seventeen.  Of  course,  my  children  cannot  go  to  a  high  school. 
The  only  school  is  the  district  school.  If  I  lived  in  Binghamton  my  children 
would  have  an  opportunity  to  go  to  the  high  school.  I  do  not  know  how  much 
the  farm  home  is  worth  to  me  and  my  family.  I  live  two  miles  from  the 
country  school  and  my  oldest  child  has  never  had  an  opportunity  to  go  to 
high  school.  Besides  the  interest,  the  $408.26  is  the  only  money  that  we 
receive  to  pay  for  my  own  dairy  labor,  the  labor  of  the  children  and  my  wife. 
She  helps  on  the  farm.  The  farm  supplies  us  with  poultry  products  and  eggs. 
I  carry  all  the  cows  the  farm  ought  to  carry.  I  bought  $240.85  worth  of 
grain.  The  prices  paid  me  for  milk  by  the  Cloverdale  Company  of  Bingham- 
ton in  1915,  in  April,  was  $1.50  per  hundred;  May,  $1.20;  June,  $1.10;.  July, 
$1.30;  October,  $1.95;  November,  $2.05;  December,  $2.05;  January,  $1.95; 
February,  $1.80;  March,  $1.75.  The  cost  figures  I  have  given  were  from 
June  1,  1915,  to  June  1,  1916." 

The  Committee  presents  the  foregoing  evidence  herewith  as 
typical  of  the  evidence  of  a  great  number  of  witnesses  whose  tes- 
timony is  on  the  record,  but  will  not  be  included  in  this  report. 
If  it  is  assumed  that  the  care  of  this  dairy  will  require  five  hours' 
labor  a  day  during  the  pasturing  season  for  165  days,  we  will  have 
825  hours;  8  hours  a  day,  winter  labor,  1,600  hours;  total,  2,425 


80 

hours,  which,  at  15  cents  an  hour,  will  amount  to  $363.75.  This 
will  leave  Mr.  Gahagan  the  sum  of  $44.51  to  pay  for  the  dairy 
services  of  the  wife  and  growing  children,  the  interest  on  his  in- 
vestment, and  a  great  number  of  miscellaneous  items  of  expense, 
are  not  considered  or  taken  into  account  in  his  cost  account 

OBSERVATIONS  ON  THOMAS  GAHAGAN'S  SITUATION 

It  appears  probable  to  the  Committee  that  Mr.  Gahagan,  with 
his  wife  and  family,  may  presently  abandon  the  dairy  business  and 
become  consumers  instead  of  producers  in  some  manufacturing 
center.  It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  this  splendid  family  of  nine 
will  miss  many  home  comforts  and  health-giving  properties  that 
the  dairy  farm  afforded  —  fresh  air,  pure  water,  garden  vege- 
tables, poultry  and  pork  —  but  the  last  two  are  only  secured  by 
intelligent  and  attentive  labor  of  the  family,  which  will  be  higher 
paid  elsewhere  perhaps;  also  the  farmhouse  home  in  preference 
to  the  city  tenement  or  flat.  The  cash  value  of  these  to  Mr.  Gaha- 
gan's  family  is  difficult  to  establish  with  any  certainty.  On  the 
other  hand,  by  a  sober  and  industrious  life  in  the  manufacturing 
center,  the  growing  family  will  have  the  free  high  school  and  per- 
chance the  university  scholarship,  shorter  hours,  lessened 
labor  of  the  housewife;  the  village  or  city  amusement 
and  entertainment,  and  by  thrift  and  united  effort,  a 
growing  savings  bank  account.  There  is  little  use  in 
considering  which  of  these  propositions  is  the  more 
attractive.  The  latter  proposition  has  proved  the  more  attractive, 
as  is  demonstrated  by  the  exodus  from  the  farms  to  the  manufac- 
turing centers.  Undoubtedly,  through  all  the  summer  months, 
Thomas  Gahagan  and  every  able-bodied  member  of  his  family 
brush  "  with  hasty  steps  the  dew  away  to  meet  the  sun,"  and  his 
lantern  anticipates  the  dawn  of  every  winter  morning.  This  is 
necessary  if  they  would  live  at  all  and  keep  up  the  farm.  Three 
remedies  suggested  for  Mr.  Gahagan's  case. 

First,  better  farming.  The  Committee  thinks  it  probable  that 
all  inquiring  men  will  concede  that  Thomas  Gahagan  is  a  good 
farmer  now.  It  may  be  that  the  extension  work  of  the  State  agri- 
cultural agencies  can  make  him  a  still  better  one.  If  so,  it  is  the 


o 

a 
2 

o 

"S 

o 


81 

plain  duty  of  the  State  promptly  to  make  every  reasonable  en- 
deavor in  that  direction. 

Second,  better  marketing.  It  is  respectfully  submitted  that 
up  to  this  time  the  State  has  in  no  substantial  way  studied  the 
marketing  problems  that  affect  the  gentleman  in  question,  and, 
who,  of  course,  the  Committee  uses  only  as  a  type  of  many  thou- 
sands of  men  similarly  situated.  Without  careful  study,  there  can 
be  no  intelligent  understanding,  so  that  it  appears  to  the  Commit- 
tee that  the  first  duty  of  the  State  is  to  make  careful  study  of  the 
marketing  conditions  that  control  the  disposition  of  his  product. 
The  study  of  this  subject  calls  for  ability  and  equipment  of  the 
first  order.  Makeshifts  will  accomplish  nothing. 

Third,  better  farm  living.  A  passable  highway  to  afford  access 
to  Thomas  Gahagan's  residence  the  State  is  already  endeavoring  to 
supply,  almost  to  the  limit  of  its  means,  but  his  children  have  no 
school.  Can  anyone  doubt  that  the  State  should  place  in  his  town- 
ship and  within  two  miles  of  his  dwelling  a  suitably  equipped 
school  so  that  these  nine  children  might  have  an  equal  advantage 
in  educational  facilities  with  any  other  nine  children  in  the  State  ? 
This  observation  is  made  not  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  all  of  the 
nine  children  on  the  Gahagan  homestead  as  they  grow  to  maturity 
but  to  keep  Mr.  Gahagan  himself  producing  during  the  years  of  his 
active  life  and  making  farm  living  agreeable  enough  to  at  least 
keep  one  or  two  of  their  children  in  producing  food-stuffs  in  this 
State.  Otherwise,  for  lack  of  school  facilities  for  their  children, 
the  State  may  lose  in  the  dairy  producing  field,  the  valuable  serv- 
ices of  himself  and  wife.  Economic  wastes  must  be  eliminated 
and  a  fair  price  received  for  his  product,  thus  affording  means  for 
better  farm  living  in  other  directions.  It  is  respectfully  submitted 
that  in  this  latter  direction  this  State,  so  far,  has  failed  to  study 
the  problems  involved  to  the  end  that  they  may  be  intelligently  un- 
derstood or  to  give  any  substantial  assistance  of  any  kind  to  the 
solution  of  those  problems. 

The  type  case  above  discussed  is  not  peculiar,  as  is  shown  by  a 
survey  of  152  farms  in  Broome  county.  Mr.  J.  F.  Eastman  of 
Einghamton,  manager  of  the  Broome  County  Farm  Bureau,  called 
as  a  witness,  testified :  That  a  survey  of  152  farms  in  that  county 


had  been  made  in  connection  with  the  work  of  the  State  ACT  Cul- 
tural College.  The  result  of  that  survey  is  shown  in  Exhibit  No. 
28,  charging  for  man  labor  at  15  cents  per  hour,  and  woman  or 
child  labor  at  10  cents  per  hour;  as  shown  by  these  records,  the 
gross  cost  of  keeping  a  cow  was  $105,  and  the  gross  returns  per 
cow,  $102,  a  net  loss  of  $3  per  cow.  The  net  herd  cost  of  milk 
was  $1.71  per  hundredweight;  the  average  selling  price  was  $1.64 
per  hundredweight. 

EXHIBIT  28 

RESULTS  OF  A  COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION  SURVEY  FOR  152  FARMS  IN  BROOME 

COUNTY 

1.  Acres  farmed 154 

2.  Number   of  cows  per  farm 13.6 

3.  Number  of  yearling  heifers  and  heifer  calves 6.7 

4.  Hundredweight   of   milk   sold 689 

5.  Dollars  received  for  milk  sold $1,129  00 

6.  Value  of  all  milk  and  milk  products  produced 1,229  00 

7.  Pounds  of  milk  sold  per  cow 5,055 

8.  Value   per   cow $65  00 

9.  Value  of  heifers  per  C.  unit 47  00 

10.  Value  of  herd,  bulk,  per  C.  unit 58  00 

11.  Gross  cost  of  keeping  a  cow 105  00 

12.  Gross    returns    per    cow 102  00 

13.  Profit  on  cows,  per  cow 3  00 

14.  Net  herd  cost  of  milk  at  market  per  cwt 1  71 

15.  Average  price  received  for  milk  sold  per  cwt 1  64 

16.  Hours  of  labor  spent  on  cow,  per  cow 169 

THE  COST  OF  PRODUCING  MILK  ON  152  FARMS  IN  BROOME  COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  FOR 

YEAR  ENDING  MAY  1,  1915 

Herds  included  in  study  were  located  in  various  parts  of  the  county,  al- 
though the  larger  part  were  in  the  vicinity  of  Windsor,  Whitney  Point  and 
Binghamton. 

Items  that  Enter  Into  the  Cost  of  Producing  Milk 

Statements  were  obtained  from  the  farm  operators  in  such  a  way  as  to 
determine  all  the  costs  incurred  by  the  dairy  herd.  These  items  were  grain, 
succulent  feed,  such  as  silage,  potatoes,  mangels,  cabbage  and  sowed  corn, 
dry  forage,  pasture  bedding,  human  labor,  horse  labor,  the  use  of  buildings, 
use  of  equipment,  interest  on  the  investment  in  stock,  and  in  feed  and  sup- 
plies, milk  hauling,  decreased  value  and  purchases  of  cattle,  and  miscellane- 
ous charges  such  as  ice,  veterinary  bills,  and  other  small  items.  In 
determining  the  net  cost  of  the  milk  at  the  market,  credit  was  given  for  milk 
and  milk  products  used  at  home,  manure,  increased  value  and  sales  of  cattle. 
The  difference  between  these  credits  and  the  charges  was  considered  to 
represent  the  cost  of  the  milk. 

Rates  at  Which  the  Items  were  Charged 

With  the  exception  of  silage  which  was  charged  at  $5  per  ton,  all  farm 
grown  feed  and  bedding  was  charged  at  its  farm  value,  as  given  by  the 
operator.  Purchased  feed  and  bedding  was  charged  at  the  price  paid  plus 


83 


the  cost  of  hauling  it  home.  Interest  and  taxes  at  5%%  of  the  value  of  the 
pasture  land,  as  given  by  the  operator;  plus  any  additional  charges  for  fences 
or  other  work  made  up  the  cost  of  pasture.  Man  or  horse  labor  in  caring  for 
the  herd  or  hauling  milk  was  charged  to  all  herds  at  15  cents  an  hour. 
All  woman  or  child  labor  was  charged  at  10  cents  per  hour.  Interest  on  the 
average  value  of  the  dairy  buildings  used  for  housing  the  cows  and  caring  for 
products,  repairs  and  insurance  comprised  the  building  charges.  The  charge 
for  the  use  of  equipment  included  interest,  repairs  and  new  equipment.  All 
interest  was  figured  at  5%.  Milk  was  credited  at  the  average  price  received 
for  milk  sold  and  manure  was  credited  at  $1.25  per  ton  at  the  barn. 

WINFIELD  S.  PECK  of  North  Norwich,  called  before  the  Com- 
mittee  and  sworn,  made  the  following  statement  : 

EXHIBIT  29 
SUMMARY  OF  BUSINESS  FOE  PELLETT  HOMESTEAD  DAIRY  FARM  FOR  YEAR  1915 

Tenant's  Capital 
3  horses  ....................................................       $550  00 

Tools  and  equipment  ........................................         450  00 


$1,000  00 

Tenant's  Expenses 

1/2  taxes $47  18 

1/2  grass  seed  12  00 

y2  oat  seed 7  00 

1/2  feed  bill 425  00 

1  hired  man 300  00 

Extra  help 60  00 

Horse    shoeing 30  00 

1/2  milk  hauling 97  42 

y2  threshing  8  00 

Repairs  and  depreciation  on  tools 50  00 

Depreciation  on  horses    50  00 

Interest  on  investment 60  00 


$1,146  60 

Total  receipts $1,455  78 

Total  expenses 1,146  60 

Tenants'  earnings $309  18 


Owner's  Capital 

Farm,  266  acres    $8,000  00 

33   cows 2,500  00 

1   bull.    ,                        '. 100  00 


$10,600  00 

Owner's  Expenses 

Interest  on  $10,600    $636  00 

i/o  milk  hauling 97  42 

1/2  taxes 47  18 

1/2  grass  seed 12  00 


84 

V2  oat  seed $7  00 

y2  feed  bill 425  00 

y2  threshing 8  00 

Loss  and  depreciation  on  cows 300  00 

Depreciation  and  repairs  on  buildings 250  00 

Insurance 17  00 


Total   expenses $1.799  60 


Total  receipts 1,455  78 


Loss $343  82 


Actual  net  receipts  on  investment 


This  farm  is  in  Chenango  county,  between  Norwich  and  Sherburne.     There 
is  a  creamery  right  on  the  farm  operated  by  Otto  Gruhn  of  Brooklyn. 

GEORGE   A.   ADAMS   of  North  Norwich,    Chenango   county, 
"N.  Y.,  made  the  following  cost  statement: 

On  a  herd  of  cows  with  an  average  production  of  8,666  pounds  per  cow: 

Receipts 

Milk $132  00 

Manure   and  calves    . .  * 17  25 

Total    receipts.    $149  25 


Expenses 

Grain $43  20 

Hay   and   silage    40  00 

Labor 25  00 

Bull  service 2  00 

Bedding 3  00 

Dairy  equipment 1  00 

Use  of  buildings   >• 6  00 

Interest,  depreciation,  and  loss  by  death 15  00 

Hauling  milk -.- 4  00 

Total  expenses $139  20 


Receipts  over  expenses  per  cow $10  00 

It  is  interesting  to  compare  this  statment  with  Dr.  Larson's 
conclusions.  They  are  undoubtedly  worked  out  independently,  the 
one  being  the  actual  expense  as  computed  by  Mr.  Adams  from  his 
books  and  records  for  the  year  previous  to  our  investigation,  the 
other  being  a  study  of  cost  data  published  by  various  states  and 
agencies  prior  thereto. 


85 

EDWIN  P.  SMITH,  Farm  Bureau  Agent  of  Chenango  county, 
called  before  the  Committee  and  sworn,  testified : 

I  have  here  a  summary  of  the  feed  costs  of  10  dairies  in  this  county, —  6 
from  New  Berlin  Cow  Testing  Association  for  the  year  ending  May  31,  1913; 
6  from  the  West  Chenango  .Cow  Testing  Association  for  the  year  ending 
February  29,  1916.  These  records  were  obtained  in  the  following  manner: 
The  figures  are  taken  from  the  books  of  the  different  Cow  Testing  Associa- 
tions. The  testers  of  each  association  visits  the  dairy  once  a  month  and 
weighs  the  milk  night  and  morning  for  each  cow  in  the  dairy  and  takes 
samples  of  it.  He  weighs  the  feed  also  and  keeps  track  of  it.  He  weighs 
the  hay,  silage  or  any  rough  fodder  in  the  grain  and  endeavors  to  keep  a 
fairly  accurate  account  of  the  amount  and  cost  of  the  food  of  the  cow.  I 
have  compiled  these  summaries  from  those  records.  These  farms  are  above 
the  average  as  they  run  through  this  county.  The  average  milk  production 
of  these  dairies,  per  cow,  is  5,463.  The  average  for  the  State  is  about  4,200. 
The  average  production  in  this  county  is  about  4,500,  and  the  average  re- 
ceipts per  cow  in  this  county  is  $59.  That  is,  according  to  the  last  census, 
and  these  receipts  are  $82.51,  over  $33  above  the  average  receipts  for  the 
county,  and  the  average  cost  for  feed  here  was  $41.33.  I  understand  there 
was  no  attempt  in  the  census  figures  to  get  actual  costs.  I  make  the  sum- 
mary as  follows: 

EXHIBIT  31 

SUMMARY  OF  PRODUCTION  AND  FEED  COSTS  OF  TEN  HERDS 
Six  in  New  Berlin  Cow  Testing  Association,  for  Year  Ending  May  31,  1916. 
Four  in  West  Chenango  Cow  Testing  Association  for  Year  Ending  February 
29,  1916. 


Herd 

No. 

Av.  milk 

Receipts 

No. 

cows 

production, 

Pounds 

Milk 

Cost  of 

above  cost 

Pounds 

B.  fat 

receipts 

feed 

of  feed 

1 

32 

5547. 

192.3 

$84  97 

$56  93 

$28  04 

2 

13 

6531.7 

241.3 

98  47 

44  48 

53  99 

3 

27 

2251.2 

117.7 

46  53 

33  59 

12  94 

4 

18 

6413.1 

217.7 

102  04 

52  91 

49  13 

5 

41 

6619.9 

246.3 

97  42 

42  60 

54  82 

6 

37 

6068.7 

236.1 

92  43 

38  25 

54  18 

7 

34 

4843  .  1 

176.6 

62  18 

32  60 

29  58 

8 

27 

5450.1 

202.1 

78  44 

34  25 

44  19 

9 

16 

4908.6 

180.3 

83  08 

40  08 

43  00 

10 

10 

6454.2 

232.9 

97  31 

54  26 

43  05 

Are.  255  5463.2  203.5  $82.51  $41.33  $41   18 

I  have  also  a  summary  showing  labor  income  of  21  dairy  farms  near  Earl- 
ville,  which  I  offer. 

Received  and  marked  Exhibit  32. 


86 


EXHIBIT  32 

SUMMARY  OF  BUSINESS  OF  TWENTY-ONE  DAIRY  FARMS  NEAR  EARLVILLE  HAV- 
ING TEN  OR  MORE  GRADE  Cow.  PERIOD  COVERED,  APRIL  IST,  1913,  TO 
APRIL  IST,  1914 


Farm 
No. 

5 

7 

8 

9 
12 
15 
16 
19 
20 
22 
27 
28 
32 
35 
37 
39 
46 
48 
50 
61 
52 


Capital 
$11,725 

11,259 

11,320 
7,926 

12,194 
9,095 
9,486 
8,563 

15,286 
6,154 
6.316 

15,702 
5,662 
4,256 
9,027 
9.186 

13,013 

10,246 
8,885 
6,207 

11,143 


No. 

cows 

16 

26 

15 

20 

24 

24 

13 

16 

22 

10 

12 

22 

14 

11 

12 

18 

20 

14 

17 

10 

20 


21 


Milk 

Labor 

receipts 

income 

$1,279 

$254 

2,100 

279 

1,570 

350 

1,200 

900     A 

2,509 

843 

1,733 

73 

1,032 

—485 

570 

360 

2,066 

76 

1,068 

716 

940 

508     1 

1,492 

352 

1,080 

348 

884 

548 

780 

162 

1,335 

525 

1,953 

1,748     0 

1,300 

86 

800 

—360 

1,000 

—230 

2,230 

—35 

$28,921 

$6,694 

1,376.10 

318.75 

. 

81.13 

Another  member  of  family 
helped;  only  $14  for  out- 
side labor. 


Tenant's  L.  I.  only  $315. 


Over    $1,000    receipts    from 
other  sources  than  milk. 


$202,651  354  $28,921          $6,694  Total 

9,650.05       17  1,376.10         318.75       Average 

Average  receipts 
I  '  r  co\v 

I  have  also  made  a  computation  from  these  cost  accounts,  records  and  prac- 
tical experience  as  a  basis  showing  comparative  results  of  dairy  herds  with 
an  average  production  per  cow  of  4,000,  6,000  and  8,000  pounds,  per  cow, 
which  is  marked  Exhibit  33. 

EXHIBIT  33 

COSTS  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION,  ESTIMATED,  USING  COST  ACCOUNT  RECORDS  AND 
PRACTICAL  EXPERIENCE  AS  BASIS 


Annual 
per  cow 
4,000.  . 

product, 
Ibs. 

Receipts 
$60  00 

Grain 

$15  00 

Hay  and 
silage, 
Roughage 
$23  00 

Fixed 
costs  * 

$30  00 

6,000.   . 

90  00 

25  00 

24  00 

35  00 

8,000. 

120  00 

35  00 

25  00 

40  00 

Annual 
per  cow 
4,000. 

product, 
Ibs. 

Int.  on 
cow  and 
hauling  costs 
$7  00 

Value 
manure 
and  coif 
$14  00 

Net 
costs 
$61  00 

Profit 
£-1    00 

6,000.  . 

11  00 

16  00 

79  00 

11  00 

8,000.  . 

15  00 

18  00 

97  00 

23  00 

Fixed  costs  —  per  cow  for  one  year : 


87 

Labor,  care  of  cow $25  00 

Bull  service 2  00 

Bedding 3  00 

Dairy  equipment 1  00 

Use  "of  buildings 8  00 

Depreciation  and  loss  by  death 6  00 

$45  00 

C.  H.  Boos,  sworn  as  a  witness,  testified: 

I  have  cost  figures  for  the  previous  year  on  my  herd  of  graded  Holstein 
cows.  The  average  production  was  9,000  pounds  of  milk,  per  cow,  on  40 
cows.  I  fed  each  cow  $55  worth  of  grain  to  get  that  production.  The  labor 
for  two  men  was  $30  a  cow.  That  was  figuring  a  man  at  $50  a  month  and 
I  was  .one  of  them  until  I  lost  my  hand,  which  I  think  was  a  good  thing  for 
me,  as  I  saved  money  by  it.  I  have  set  down  my  cost  accounts  per  cow  in 
Exhibit  No.  34. 

EXHIBIT  34 
ESTIMATED  MILK  EXPENSES  OF  C.  H.  Boos,  SHERBUBNE,  N.  Y. 

Feed,  per  cow $55  00 

Labor 30  00 

Hay  and  silage 35  00 

Bull   service 2  00 

Loss  by  death 5  00 

Interest  and  depreciation 15  00 

$142  00 


9,000  pounds  milk,  at  $1.50  per  cwt $135  00 


I  did  not  estimate  the  value  of  manure  or  calf,  but  I  have  nothing  charged 
for  the  use  of  barn  or  anything  like  that.  The  labor  and  food  and  such 
things  was  $142  a  cow.  I  think  the  price  received  for  the  milk  averaged 
about  $1.46  per  hundredweight,  sold  to  the  Sanitary  Company  at  Sherburne, 
N.  Y.  They  say  they  will  pay  as  much  as  the  others  do,  or  Bordens  do.  They 
tested  for  butter- fat  until  the  past  summer,  and  then  we  would  not  stand  for 
it  any  more;  we  did  not  think  we  were  getting  a  fair  test.  Mr.  Berg,  presi- 
dent, came  up  and  we  discussed  the  milk  proposition  with  him.  We  simply 
said  we  could  not  produce  the  milk  for  what  we  were  getting  and  did  not 
think  we  were  getting  a  fair  deal.  We  did  not  think  there  was  anything 
crooked  in  the  company,  but  they  were  testing  the  milk  in  the  cooler  room, 
and  I  do  not  think  they  gave  a  fair  test  during  the  winter.  They  said  they 
would  remedy  that,  but  we  asked  them  to  pay  what  Bordens  did  for  3.5 
milk.  We  regarded  3.5  as  being  a  fair  average  of  the  butter-fat  test  and 
asked  them  to  pay  a  fiat  price.  We  think  we  had  better  take  3.5  and  not 
have  any  test.  I  think  it  was  better  than  the  average  we  had  gotten  at  the 
station  during  the  previous  year.  Several  left  the  station  and  went  to  Otto 
Gruhn's.  The  milk  is  pasteurized  and  shipped  to  New  York  in  forty-quart 
cans.  We  finally  agreed  that  the  Standard  people  should  pay  the  Borden 
price  for  3.5-B  milk  for  six  months.  When  Bordens  increased  their  price  ten 
cents  this  summer  they  raised  our  price  ten  cents. 


BARNARD  AKER  of  East  Cobleskill,  1ST.  Y.,  called  and  swon 
made  the  following  statement: 

In  my  experience  the  cost  of  keeping  a  dairy  cow  for  one  year  at  preser 
prices  is  as  follows: 

Two  tons  of  hay  or  its  equivalent $30  0 

Pasture,  together  with  necessary  green  food 150 

Eight  pounds  of  grain  per  day  for  200  days,  at  $1.70  per  hundred- 
weight      27  2 

Two  pounds  of  grain  per  day  for  165  days,  at  $1.70  per  hundred- 
weight      56 

Necessary  labor  for  taking  care  of  one  cow  for  one  year 21  3 

Deterioration  in  value  of  cow  worth  $60,  5  per  cent 30 

Use  of  stable  and  tools 15 

Interest  on  investment,  5  per  cent,  on  $60  cow 30 

Total   .  $106  6 


There  are  other  expenses',  such  as  loss  by  death,  veterinary  expenses,  insui 
ance,  washing  dairy  utensils,  ice,  and  so  forth,  which  easily  makes  the  cos 
$115  per  year  per  cow.  At  present  prices  paid  for  milk,  the  product  of  th 
average  herd  amounts  to  less  than  $100  per  cow.  The  dairyman  is  suffering 
loss  of  $15  per  cow  per  year,  while  his  expenses  for  living  and  for  labor  ar 
increasing.  The  price  of  milk  must  be  increased  25  per  cent,  to  put  the  com 
pensation  of  the  farmer  in  line  with  that  of  other  labor. 

The  following  statement  of  the  general  farm  account  froi 
April  3,  1914,  to  April  3,  1915,  is  testified  to  by  H.  L.  Elliotl 
Winthrop,  !N.  Y.,  which  is  of  particular  interest  as  showing  tb 
value  of  skim  milk  products  retained  on  the  farm  and  turned  int< 
hogs  and  calves: 

EXHIBIT  NO.  95 

INCOME  AND  EXPENSES  ON  FARM  OF  H.  C.  ELLIOTT,  WINTHBOP,  210  ACRES 
April  3,  1914,  to  April  3,  1915 

Income  for  butter-fat,  31  cows    (total  gross-) $1,711  32 

Poultry  and  egg  sales 210  00 

Hogs  and  calves 850  00 

Hay  sales,  5  tons,  at  $15 75  00 

Two  cows  sold,  $60  each 120  00 

$2,966  35 

Expense  Account 

Purchased   feed,   total $550  00 

Labor,  one  man,  $33,  8  months 264  00 

Labor,  one  man,  yearly,  $16 192  00 

Cash  board,  two  men,  equal  one  man  20  months',  at 

$10   200  00 

Labor,  son,  three  months,  at  $30 90  00 

Shoeing   and   harness   repairs 55  00 

Depreciation  on  machinery,  10  per  cent,  on  $850. .  .  85  00 

Repairs  on  buildings    (annual  average) 130  00 

Insurance  per  year 15  00 

Interest  on  stock  and  farm,  $10,500,  at  5  per  cent.  525  00 

Fencir/g  renewal,  $85  per  year 85  00 


89 

Small  tools,  pails,  oil  and  gasoline $35  00 

Depreciation  on  horses,  $900,  at  10  per  cent 90  00 

$2,316  00 


Labor  income  of  owner $650  32 


No  value  made  of  manure  because  feed  charged  to  herd  at  low  valuation 
and  little  income  was  received  from  cash  crops. 

CHARLES  S.  PHELPS,  Farm  Bureau  Manager  for  St.  Law- 
rence county,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

I  have  computed  a  summary  report  on  142  farm  records  taken  in  the  town 
of  Gouverneur  in  1913,  which  is  marked  Exhibit  100. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  100 

SOME  IMPORTANT  FACTORS  FOB  SUCCESS  IN  DAIRY  FARMING 

Summary  Report  on  142  Farm  Records  Taken  in  Town  of  Gouverneur,  1913 

TABLE  I. —  Average  on  142  Dairy  Farms 

Average  milk  receipts $1,759  00 

Average  other  receipts 684  00 


Average  total  receipts $2,443  00 

Average  cash  expenses $838  00 

Unpaid  labor  and  board  of  help 242  00 

Average  total  expenses ,  1,080  00 

Receipts    less    expenses $1,363  00 

Five  per  cent,  interest  on  total  farm  capital  of  $13,175  deducted.  659  00 

Labor  income  of  farmer $704  00 


Relation  of  Cow  Receipts  to  Labor  Income 
Dividing  these  farms  into  seven  groups,  according  to  the  value  of  the  milk 

sold  per  cow,  shows  a  marked  effect  on  the  labor  income. 

The   value  of  the   milk  sold  per   cow  was   found  by   dividing  the   dollars 

received  for  milk  or  butter  by  the  average  number  of  cows  on  hand  at  the 

beginning  and  end  of  the  year. 


TABLE 

II.—  Effect  of 

Cow  Receipts  on  Labor 

Income 

Number  of 

Farms  making 

Milk  .sold 

Labor 

farms    in 

labor  income 

per  cow. 

income. 

each  group. 

over  $1,000. 

Below   $50 

$253 

8 

1 

$50  to    59 

400 

14 

0 

60  to    69 

514 

24 

2 

70  to     79 

619 

33 

5 

80  to     89 

755 

32 

8 

90  to     99 

1,019 

20 

9 

Over      100 

1,366 

11 

6 

142  31 


90 

Increasing  the  milk  receipts  per  cow  $10  resulted  in  increasing  the  labor 
income  between  $100  and  $300.  Out  of  142  farms  only  31  made  a  labor 
income  of  better  than  $1,000;  this  is  one  farm  out  of  five.  Of  the  22  farms 
in  the  two  groups  having  the  poorest  grade  of  cows  only  one  made  $1,000. 
With  poor  cows  there  is  practically  no  chance  for  a  large  success.  Of  the  31 
farms  in  the  two  groups  having  the  best  grade  of  cows  15  made  labor  incomes 
of  over  $1,000;  thus  with  good  cows  half  the  farms  made  a  large  labor  income. 

TABLE  III. —  Effect  of  Total  Capital  (size)  on  Labor  Incomes 


Total 
Under 
$5,000 
8,001 
11,001 
14,001 
Over 

Average $13,175  169  23  704 


No.  farms 

Capital 

Average 
capital 

Avg.  No. 
acres 

Avg  No.  Labor 
cows     Income 

No.  L. 
farms 

I.  over 
$1,000 

$5,000 

$4,058 

62 

9           $479 

6 

0 

8,000 

6,804 

114 

13             444 

18 

1 

11,000 

9,582 

122 

18             573 

30 

4 

14,000 

12,624 

167 

22             613 

36 

5 

20,000 

16,341 

202 

27            807 

33 

11 

20,000 

23,305 

272 

39          1,221 

19 

10 

Farms  with  the  smallest  capital  averaged  62  acres  and  9  cows.  The  acres 
and  the  cows  increased  regularly  in  each  group  until  the  farms  with  over 
$20,000  capital  have  272  acres  and  39  cows.  The  labor  incomes  also  increased 
with  the  size  of  the  business.  None  of  the  farms  in  the  group  with  the 
smallest  capital  made  as  much  as  $1,000  and  in  the  next  group  only  one 
farm  out  of  18  made  this  amount.  The  chances  for  success  are  better  with 
a  large  business,  that  is,  more  land  and  more  cows.  Of  the  19  farms  having 
over  $20,000  capital,  and  an  average  of  39  cows,  10  farms,  or  over  50%,  made 
over  $1,000. 

TABLE  IV. —  Number  of  Sources  of  Income.     Effect  of  Specialized  Milk  Pro- 
duction  on  Labor   Income 

Per  cent,  of  total  receipts  No.  of     Average 

derived  from  milk  farms,   labor  income 

100       80%  milk  sales   44             $554 

79       70%    milk   sales    40               751 

69       60%  milk  sales   37               774 

Less  than  60%  milk  sales    21               806 


Milk  is  the  important  income  in  this  region.  Some  farmers  depend  on  rais- 
ing and  selling  stock.  This  amounts  to  considerable  on  a  few  registered 
etock  farms.  Pigs  and  pork  are  a  source  of  income  on  most  cheese  factory 
farms.  Hay  is  sold  on  a  few  farms.  A  number  of  farms  derive  good  income 
from  poultry  and  especially  from  turkeys.  The  44  farms  that  made  the 
largest  part  of  their  income  from  milk  production  made  less  than  those 
which  had  other  sources  of  income.  The  largest  labor  incomes  are  gener- 
ally made  on  farms  that  combine  other  branches  of  farming  with  milk 
production. 


91 


Farm  No.  4 
Farm  No.  13 
Farm  No.  14 
Farm  No.  16 
Farm  No.  26 
Farm  No.  29 
Farm  No.  33 
Farm  No.  34 
Farm  No.  35 
Farm  No.  48 
Farm  No.  49 
Farm  No.  51 
Farm  No.  52 
Farm  No.  53 
Farm  No.  56 
Farm  No.  58 
Farm  No.  60 
Farm  No.  61 
Farm  No.  71 
Farm  No.  76 
Farm  No.  79 
Farm  No.  80 
Farm  No.  84 
Farm  No.  85 
Farm  No.  87 
Farm  No.  98 


Number  of 
cows  in  dairy 

23 

15 

23 

16 

14 

15 

18 

25 

31 

20 
8 

26 

15 

25 

18 

25 

25 

26 

11 

20 

12 

20 

32 

17 

32 

37 


Returns 
per  cow,  1913 
$76  00 

98  00 
109  00 

90  00 

67  00 
57  00 

89  00 

90  00 
•  95  00 

59  00 

68  00 
100  00 

68  00 
108  00 
83  00 
88  00 
82  00 
70  00 
70  00 
75  00 
50  00 
90  00 

60  00 
103  00 

90  00 
81  00 


F.  A.  HOUGH  of  Massena,  N.  Y.,  testified  to  the  Committee: 

I  have  kept  records  on  my  farm  from  1906  to  1915,  of  the  num- 
ber of  cows,  the  production  per  cow,  per  annum,  the  pounds  of 
milk  sold,  and  the  price  received.  Statement  received  and  marked 
Exhibit  105. 


Ytar 


1906. 
1907. 
1908. 
1909. 
1910. 
1911. 
1912. 
1913. 
1914. 
1915. 


No. 
Cows 

35 
35 
30 
30 
30 
29 
30 
29 
32 
30 


EXHIBIT  NO.  105 


Lbs. 
per 
cow 
5,116 
4,676 
4,994 
4,454 
5,029 
4,971 
5,818 
4,898 
4,460 
5,397 


Pounds 
Milk 
sold 
179,073 
163,671 
149,961 
136,583 
150,892 
144,146 
174,548 
142,048 
142,724 
161,918 


Average 
Price 


.06 

.07 

.15 

.17 

.26 

.12 

.34 

1.36 

1.26 

1.45 


Received 
for  Milk 

$1,657  66 
1,762  02 
1,521  38 
,602  60 
,915  02 
,716  82 
,336  86 
,938  20 
,797  18 
2,134  00 


II.  B.  LIVERMOEE  of  Sangerfield,  Oneida  county,  testified 
that  with  the  average  production  per  cow  of  over  10,000  pounds, 
the  cost  of  producing  100  pounds  of  milk  in  the  year  preceding 


92 

this  inquiry,  with  that  production,  was  $1,734,  and  makes  the  fol- 
lowing statement,  which  is  marked  Exhibit  111 : 

EXHIBIT  NO.   Ill 

COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION  — 10  Cows 
Charges: 

Bedding $11  80 

Hauling  milk 8  25 

Man  labor  2,869  man  hours  at  .1451 416  34 

Horse  labor  516  hours  at  .2185 112  74 

Use  of  equipment,  151  hours  at  .076 11  48 

New  equipment 4  75 

Use  of  buildings   30  00 

Interest   on   stock 130  38 

Miscellaneous 2  00 

Roughage 788  71 

Concentrates.   .  475  65 


Total $1,992  10 


Credits: 

10  calves  at  $2 $20  00 

Manure  —  92   tons  at  $1.50 138  00 

Milk  —  105,779   Ibs.   at  $1.65 1,749  10 


$1,907  10 

Charges  minus  credit  for  manure  and  calves' $1,834  10 

Cost  to  produce  100  Ibs.  milk $1 .734 

Roughage 39 . 6% 

Concentrates 23 . 9% 

Labor 20 . 9% 

Returns  per  hour  man  labor .115 

Average  production  p^r  cow • 10,578  Ibs. 

M.  C.  JONES  of  Stittville,  Oneida  county,  1ST.  Y.,  testified  to 
the  cost  of  milk  production  in  the  year  ending  1916,  and 

made  the  following  statement,  which  is  marked  Exhibit 
No.  112: 

EXHIBIT  NO.  112 

COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION,  1916 
Charges: 

First  inventory $2,145  00 

Cattle  bought 170  00 

Interest 104  12 

Milk  hauling 228  75 

Labor 887  00 

Equipment 11  41 

Buildings 108  90 

Miscellaneous 44  40 

Roughage 1,162  40 

Concentrates 525  89 

$5,387  87 


93 

Credits : 

Second  inventory $2,020  00 

Cattle  sold 421  25 

Manure 225  00 

Milk  (used  in  house)   1,460  Ibs 23  65 

Milk   (cheese  factory)   830  Ibs 9  13 

Milk    ( condensary )    122,581  Ibs 1,870  78 


$4,569  79 
Loss $818  08 


Returns  per  man  hour  worked,  per  hour .  022 

Cost  to  produce  100  Ibs.  milk   2. 18 

Sale  price  of  milk  per  cwt 1 . 524 


FEED  DECK,   a  dairyman   of  the  town   of  Marcy,  Oneida 

county,  made  the  following  cost  estimate  of  milk  produc- 
tion in  a  dairy  of  17  cows  which  he  sold  at  $1.66  per  hun- 
dred-weight : 

EXHIBIT  NO.  113 

COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION  — 17  Cows 
Charges: 

Hauling $144  00 

Man  labor,  2,958  hours 632  00 

Horse  labor  416  hours 72  80 

Equipment 68  65 

Buildings 177  40 

Miscellaneous 65  75 

Roughage 971  00 

Concentrates 372  26 

Interest  on  stock.  .  75  50 


$2,579  36 
2,495  03 

Loss $84  33 


Credits : 

Live  stock  sales  and  net  increase $212  00 

Manure 210  00 

Milk,  123,844  Ibs.  at  $1.65 2,073  03 


$2,495  03 

Cost  to  produce  100  Ibs 1 .742 

Returns  per  hour  man  labor .18% 

Average  production  per  cow 7,284  Ibs. 


94 

F.  O.  Boss,  Farm  Bureau  Agent  of  Oneida  county,  gave  the 
following  testimony: 

"  The  record  of  157  herds  in  this  county  containing  2,363  cows 
that  completed  full  yearly  records  have  been  collected  and  sum- 
marized by  groups  according  to  their  production. 

Summarizing  all  herds  that  average  not  more  than  6,000  pounds 
of  milk  per  cow,  it  is  found  that  there  were  42  such  herds  having 
a  total  of  751  cows  whose  average  production  was  5,133.8  pounds 
of  milk,  or  500  pounds  more  per  cow  than  the  last  Federal  census 
gave  as  the  production  for  Oneida  county  cows.  These  records 
were  secured  in  the  regular  way  by  the  dairy  demonstrator  visiting 
each  herd  once  a  month,  making  an  accurate  weight  of  the  milk 
produced  in  24  hours,  the  butter  fat  is  determined  and  the  pro- 
duction of  the  month  computed.  He  also  weighs  the  feed  of  each 
cow  and  keeps  a  record  of  the  food  costs.  In  these  records  the  hay 
is  given  a  uniform  value  of  $15  per  ton,  with  silage  1/3  the  value 
of  hay.  The  grain  is  charged  at  cost. 

The  records  of  these  751  cows  show  that  the  average  production 
per  cow  was  5,133.8  pounds  of  milk,  testing  3.761  per  cent  of 
butter  fat,  or  a  total  of  193.1  pounds  of  butter  fat  per  cow.  The 
average  price  received  was  $1.534  per  hundred  pounds,  or  $78.76. 
Each  cow  is  further  credited  with  $18  for  manure  and  offspring, 
making  a  total  credjit  of  $96.76.  The  average  cost  of  roughage 
was  $39.29,  with  grain  cost  at  $14.56,  a  total  feed  cost  of  $53.86 
per  cow.  The  food  cost  of  $53.86  taken  from  the  milk  receipt  of 
$78.76  gives  a  balance  of  $24.89  above  the  feed  cost. 

Costs  other  than  feed  and  labor  were  averaged  at  $29.41,  which 
was  secured  by  averaging  hundreds  of  official  survey  and  cost  ac- 
count reports.  Subtracting  the  credit  of  $18  from  this,  leaves  a 
balance  of  $11.41,  which,  if  taken  from  the  balance  over  feed  of 
$24.89  leaves  $13.48  to  pay  for  the  labor  required  to  milk  and 
care  for  the  cow  one  year,  or  will  pay  nine  and  six-tenths  cents 
per  hour  for  the  labor.  If  the  dairyman  figured  his  time  in  at 
twenty  cents  per  hour,  the  average  cow  giving  5,133  pounds  of 
milk  in  these  associations  would  fail  by  $14.52  to  pay  him. 

The  dairymen  in  the  cow  test  associations  are  not  average  men, 
but  the  best  dairymen,  who  want  to  know  what  their  cows  are  do- 


95 

ing  and  to  discard  the  poorer  ones  as  shown  by  their  records.  We 
not  only  have  the  better  class  of  dairymen  in  the  association,  but 
we  have  only  their  best  cows  tabulated,  because  we  only  have  those 
that  were  allowed  to  complete  their  full  year.  Any  cow  that  failed 
in  production,  or  went  wrong  from  any  of  the  many  causes  they 
are  subject  to,  does  not  appear;  therefore,  we  are  showing  these 
in  their  best  light,  and  their  records  clearly  show  that  the  average 
cow  cannot  be  expected  to  pay  market  price  for  the  food  and  labor 
required. 

In  the  entire  157  herds  which  were  far  better  than  the  average 
are  considered,  we  find  the  2,363  cows  averaged  6,709  pounds  of 
milk,  containing  236.6  pounds  of  butter  fat.  The  average  price 
received  was  $1.53  per  hundred  pounds,  valued  at  $102.71 
per  cow.  Eoughage  cost  $42.61,  grain  $22.79,  making  a  total  food 
cost  of  $65.40.  Using  the  same  charges  as  above,  we  find  the  owner 
would  receive  18%  cents  per  hour,  or  would  lack  $2.10  per  cow 
in  receiving  pay  at  the  rate  of  20  cents  per  hour. 

THEODORE   F.   SAYBOLD,  called  before  the   Committee,   tes- 
tified : 

"  My  post  office  address  is  Durhamville,  Madison  county.  I  am 
a  dairyman.  At  this  time,  August,  1916,  I  am  getting  $1.65  per 
hundred  pounds  of  milk  from  the  Levy  Dairy  Company.  Barn 
is  scored.  I  am  now  selling  to  a  Mr.  Whaley,  who  I  understand 
buys  the  milk  for  the  Borden's  and  get  the  Borden  prices.  It  is 
only  hearsay  that  it  goes  to  Borden' s,  except  the  cans  are  tagged 
from  Borden's.  I  went  to  Levy's  up  to  June  13,  1914.  In  June  I 
got  $1.15  for  an  85  pound  can  and  about  $1.35  per  hundred 
pounds.  I  think  I  got  a  better  price  than  the  average  Borden 
patron  at  that  time.  This  is  in  the  32  cent  zone.  Whaley  is  go- 
ing to  pay  $1.37  in  July,  I  suppose.  That  is  the  Borden  price 
for  3.7  milk,  scoring  68.  The  Bordens  buy  through  Whaley.  Dur- 
ing the  year  ending  July  1,  1916,  I  received  from  my  cows  $1,- 
775.23.  My  total  farm  expenses  were  $1,026.25.  This  left  a 
balance  of  $748.98.  Interest  on  my  investment  amounts  to 
$526.50.  This  left  a  balance  of  $222.48.  This  last  balance  repre- 
sents the  wages  that  my  family  and  myself  have  been  able  to  earn 
so  far  as  the  farm  is  concerned.  I  have  made  no  charge  for  depre- 


96 

elation  in  value  of  cows,  as  we  have  been  fortunate  in  not  losing 
any  during  the  year  and  have  raised  calves  to  replace  or  make 
good  in  case  of  loss  by  accident  or  depreciation,  due  to  age.  There- 
fore, I  have  not  credited  the  farm  with  the  calves  so  raised.  The 
production  of  my  dairy  averages  7,792  pounds,  five  being  heifers 
with  first  calf,  three  of  these  cows  are  pure-bred  Holsteins  which 
might  be  valued  from  $200  to  $600,  although  in  figuring  my  in- 
vestment I  have  valued  them  on  the  basis  of  grades,  My  farm 
consists  of  95  acres.  My  investment  is  as  follows: 

Farms $6,500  00 

3  horses 500  00 

15  cows  at  $75 1,125  00 

Tools  and  equipment   650  00 


Total  investment $8,775  00 


"  I  see  I  have  figured  my  interest  wrong.  At  6  per  cent  it 
would  be  $526.50.  I  sold  from  the  dairy  116,879  pounds  of  milk 
at  an  average  price  of  $1.52%  per  hundred  pounds,  for  which  I 
received  $1,775.23,  this  being  practically  all  that  was  sold  off  the 
farm  during  this  year.  My  expenses  were  as  follows: 

Farm  seeds $57  00 

Grain  purchased    231  25 

Hired  labor.  .  .    . k 326  00 

Hired  pasture 

Repairs  on  tools  and  incidentals.  . .-.- 132  00 

Filing  the  silo   10  00 

Threshing 9  00 

Fertilizer  and  lime 89  00 

Taxes >,  39  00 

Insurance •: 21  00 

Veterinary  and  medicines   11  00 

Repairs  on  buildings    67  00 

$1,026  25 


G.  W.  CLINCH,  of  Westmoreland,  Oneida  County,  called  be- 
fore the  Committee,  testified: 

"  I  have  a  record  of  all  my  farm  expenses  for  the  year  1915. 
The  labor  is  mostly  done  by  my  own  family.  I  have  my  farm 
expenses  all  in.  We  do  not  use  tobacco  or  intoxicating  drinks  and 
hardly  ever  go  away  from  home.  We  do  work  hard.  This  account 
is  accurate  and  true.  We  produced  108,590  pounds  of  milk  on  an 


I 

>o 

o 


97 

107  acre  farm  from  17  cows,  which  is  an  average  of  6,387  pounds 
of  milk  per  cow.     My  receipts  were  as  follows : 

Cows  sold $223  00 

Calves  sold 3 48  50 

Service  of   bull    2  80 

108,590  pounds  of  milk  at  $1.49  per  cwt 1,603  71 

Total  receipts $1,878  01 

Expenses 

Cows  bought :.; . .  $353  00 

Feed  purchased 323  37 

Sundries  purchased -_.- 30  00 

Hay  and  ensilage    714  00 

Pasture ^  112  00 

Labor.  .  365  00 


$1,897  37 

"  Our  family  consisted  of  father,  mother,  grandmother  and  two 
children,  aged  nine  and  four  years.  Hired  a  boy  seven  months. 
Receipts  from  the  entire  farm  were  as  follows: 

Cows -, $1,878  01 

Hens 107  61 

Hay 280  51 

Miscellaneous 157  98 


Total $2,424  11 


Our  expenses  were  as  follows: 

Church $99  42 

Clothing 50  75 

Groceries 290  55 

Household 184  26 

Doctor 34  20 

Taxes >:.  74  95 

Interest  and  insurance    147  41 

Repairs  and  seeds,  etc 2. .  287  60 

Horses 158  72 

Hens -.- 27  76 

Cows ' 706  37 

Labor 168  90 

Principal  paid 100  00 

Cash  on  hand  over  last  year 93  22 


Total $2,424  11 


k  You  will  notice  that  the  principal  was  paid,  $100,  and  cash 
on  hand  over  last  year  was  ninety  odd  dollars,  so  that  we  have  for 
our  labor,  above  expenses,  one  hundred  and  ninety  odd  dollars." 
4 


98 


Mr.  J.  R.  TEALL,  Farm  Bureau  Agent  of  Cayuga  county, 
testified : 

"  I  have  been  the  Farm  Bureau  Agent  of  Cayuga  county  since 
April  1,  1914.  In  1915,  we  took  surveys  of  50  farms  located 
throughout  the  county  in  all  parts  of  the  county.  I  have  classified 
24  of  these  farms  that  have  five  or  more  cows  that  were  purely 
shippers  of  milk.  In  other  words,  none  of  these  farms  made  up 
their  butter  on  the  farm;  they  either  shipped  their  milk  or  took 
it  to  the  creamery.  I  have  their  investment,  the  average  produc- 
tion per  cow,  the  price  per  hundred  pounds,  and  records  of  the 
receipts  per  cow,  and  the  value  of  feed  per  cow.  I  have  not  got- 
ten the  labor  costs.  The  average  number  of  cows  on  the  24  farms 
was  11.2 ;  their  average  value  was  $88 ;  the  average  number  of 
pounds  of  milk  per  cow  was  5,619.  The  average  price  received 
per  hundred  pounds  of  milk  was  $1.47.  That  was  the  average  price 
paid  for  the  milk.  The  average  receipts  per  cow  were  $82.99. 
The  value  of  feed  per  cow,  per  year,  was  $69.45.  Interest  on  the 
average  investment  at  6  per  cent  was  $5.25.  -That  left  a  margin 
of  $8.26  to  pay  the  labor,  the  use  of  pasture,  the  use  of  bulls, 
equipment  and  depreciation.  The  minus  signs  in  Exhibit  154  in- 
dicate a  loss;  that  is,  the  figures  show  that  the  returns  were  not 
sufficient  by  such  amount  to  pay  for  the  value  of  feed  per  cow  and 
interest  on  the  investment." 


EXHIBIT  NO.  154 


No.  of 
farms " 

c-5-1.  . 
S-c-3.  . 
8-  c-2.  . 
5-c-9.  . 
3-c-2.  . 
x-5  .  . 
8-c-l.  . 
d-f-2.  . 
5-d-3.  . 
d-5-1.  . 
2-c-2.  . 
5-c-lO. 
5-6-6.  . 
5-d-13. 
l-d-2.  . 
6-c-l.  . 
4-d-2.  . 
5-C-7.  . 


No.  of 

Avg. 

cows 

value 

10. 

75 

16.5 

150 

5.5 

60 

45. 

75 

9.5 

200 

5.5 

77 

7. 

75 

7. 

100 

7. 

75 

9. 

65 

7. 

93 

13.5 

55 

21.5 

100 

10. 

40 

7.5 

50 

30. 

78 

15. 

85 

11. 

75 

Pounds   Price 

of  milk    per 

per  cow    cwt. 

4044      1.64 

6830 

.41 

3360 

.26 

6920 

.88 

5710 

.29 

4580 

.25 

5430 

.50 

5657 

.64 

7060 

.41 

5400 

.56 

4900 

.38 

4520 

.64 

5048 

.64 

2840 

.41 

7770     1.40 

7220     1.36 

6300     1.36 

5700     1.50 

99 


9-a-l  

16.5   156 

7-c-l  

11.     65 

3-c-l  

11.    200 

5-c-4  

17.     75 

5-d-16  

12.     40 

4-e-l  

5.5    65 

281.   2129 

Ave  

11.2    88 

Value  I 

Receipts  feed 

per     per   ] 

cow    cow 

c-5-1  

67     75 

3-C-3  

96     81 

S-c-2  

43     62 

5-C-9  

130     84 

S-c-2  

74     65 

x-5  

57     53 

8-c-l  

86     106 

d-f-2  

93     78 

5-d-3  

99     79 

d-5-1  

83     60 

2-c-2  

67     66 

5-c-lO  

74     51 

5-6-6  

83     78 

5-d-13  

40     36 

l-d-2  

•  111     77 

6-c-l  

98     56 

4-d-2  

86     65 

5-c-7  

84.50   63 

9-a-l  

100.80   80 

7-c-l  

72.47   69 

3-c-l  

98.59   64 

5-c-4  

105.71   58 

5-d-16  

62.54   72 

4-e-l  

75.33   88 

1192.94  1666 

82.99   69.45 

6300 
4930 
6760 
5623 
5300 
5707 

134869 
5619 


1.60 
1.47 
1.46 
1.88 
1.18 
1.32 

35.44 
1.477 


Profit  above 
rest  labor-pasture, 
on  use  of 

investment     bldg.  and 
at  6%       equipment 


4.50 
9.00 
3.60 
4.50 
12.00 
4.62 
4.50 
6.00 
4.50 
3.90 
5.58 
3.30 
6.00 


2.40 
3.50 
4.68 
5.10 
4.50 
9.36 
3.90 
10.00 
4.70 
2.40 
3.90 


5.28 


-12.50 

6.00 

-22.60 

41.50 

-3.00 

-  .62 

-24.50 

9.00 

15.50 

19.10 

-4.58 

9.70 

-1.00 


1.60 
30.50 
37.32 
15.90 
17.00 
10.64 
-  .43 
24.59 
33.01 
-11.86 
-15.56 


8.26 


"  I  have  here  three  complete  records  of  three  farms.  The  first 
farm  has  nine  cows;  the  total  feed  cost  for  that  herd  was  $662; 
labor  cost  $252 ;  interest  on  investment  $61.20.  We  considered 
that  there  was  no  depreciation,  because  of  the  fact  that  he  had 
some  young  stock  which  he  said  were  worth  more  at  the  end  of  the 
year,  so  there  was  no  depreciation.  As  a  building  charge,  $101, 
that  includes  interest  on  his  investment  and  waste  of  the  building. 
Equipment  cost,  $9.30;  bull  service  for  the  herd,  $25.25;  bedding 
cost,  $128 ;  miscellaneous  cost,  which  includes  the  veterinary, 


100 

medicines,  insurance  on  stock  and  feed  grinding,  etc.,  $26.  Total 
cost,-  $1,254.75.  This  man  sold  41,894  pounds  of  milk  at  an  aver- 
age of  $1.64  for  100  pounds,  $687.0G.  Value  of  manure,  $135 ; 
calves  sold,  $93.  Total  receipts  from  the  herd,  $915.06.  He  lost 
$339.69.  The  average  production  per  cow  was  4,600  pounds. 
There  was  also  a  hauling  charge  of  $93.60  which  was  not  included 
in  there. 

Here  is  another  farm  of  five  cows : 

Expenses 


Labor  

140  85 

Interest  charge  . 

16  20 

Depreciation.  

27  00 

Building   rent  

56  35 

Equipment   rent 

1  00 

Bull  service.   . 

5  00 

Bedding  

..;  60  00 

Miscellaneous  cost 

3  50 

$633  30 

Receipts 

Milk   sold,    27,950   pounds   at  $1.64   per   hundred 

pounds $468  54 

Manure 75  00 

Veal  calves.  .  42  25 


Total   receipts $586  39 


Average  number  of  pounds  milk  per  cow,  5,592  pounds.  Cost 
to  produce  per  100  pounds,  $1.84.  Loss,  $47.51. 

Mr.  Ward. —  There  is  another  item  that  they  say  ought  to  be 
added  in;  that  is,  in  addition  to  the  labor  return  the  farmer  got 
the  home ;  that  has  a  cash  value.  For  instance,  if  he  worked  hard 
in  Auburn  for  $20  a  week,  a  large  part  of  his  money  is  going  for 
fuel,  house  rent,  etc.  A  dairyman  gets  that  as  a  by-product. 

Mr.  Teall. —  That  item,  of  course,  should  be  given  a  considera- 
tion. We  give  that  item  a  consideration  when  we  figure  the  labor 
in  the  whole  farm. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  dairy  ought  to  get  a  part  of  it. 

Mr.  Teall. —  The  dairy  ought  to  get  a  part  of  it.  I  don't  know 
how  you  can  tell  how  much  the  dairy  should  be  given  credit  for. 


101 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  are  trying  to  get  some  men's  ideas  on  that. 
They  tell  us  that  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
has  averaged  a  large  number  of  farm  homes  in  the  different  States, 
ten  different  States,  and  they  have  reached  the  conclusion  that  the 
average  farm  home  has  a  cash  value  of  about  $400  per  year  to  the 
fanner.  What  do  you  think  about  that  —  house  rent,  fuel,  and 
these  things  I  speak  of  ?  You  can  gather  the  eggs,  etc.,  with  little 
labor. 

Mr.  Teall. —  It  is  a  big  item,  there  is  no  question  about  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Is  $400  a  year  about  right?  Some  of  the  wit- 
nesses say  that  is  twice  too  much. 

Mr.  Teall. —  I  did  not  appreciate  that  part  until  I  had  to  pay 
rent  myself,  and  I  come  to  realize  that  it  is  quite  an  item.  I  think 
it  is  within  $400. 

A  Voice. —  You  get  all  those  eggs  and  garden  stuff  if  you  work 
for  them,  but  not  unless  you  do. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Some  men  have  good  wives  who  take  care  of  the 
poultry  and  the  garden  and  are  not  expected  apparently  to  get  paid 
for  their  work. 

A  Voice. —  She  has  to  have  food  and  clothing  though,  anyway. 

Mr.  Teall. —  I  have  here  another  herd  of  eight  cows  with  an 
average  production  of  7,000  pounds.  It  costs  him  to  produce  milk 
$2.05  per  hundred  pounds.  He  sold  it  for  $1.64  per  hundred 
pounds.  The  reason  this  man  lost  money  on  his  herd  was  because 
he  used  land  that  was  worth  $125  an  acre  for  pasture.  That  land 
was  in  the  town  of  Sennett.  The  land  was  more  useful  and  valu- 
able for  other  purposes  than  for  pasture.  He  has  an  expensive 
bam  that  ho  is  housing  these  cattle  in,  more  expensive  than  is 
necessary.  At  present  prices,  the  man  is  bound  to  lose  money, 
however,  on  a  herd  that  produces  less  than  6,000  pounds  per  cow." 

GEORGE  A.  SMITH  of  the  New  York  State  Experiment  Farm 
at  Geneva,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  have  charge  of  the  dairy  work  at  the  State  Experiment  Sta- 
tion. We  have  a  herd  of  26  dairy  cows,  pure-bred,  registered 
cattle.  We  have  only  a  small  field  that  we  can  -iss  f<<r:  the 


102 

rim  in  and  exercise,  and  the  cows  are  fed  from  food  cut  on  the 
land  and  stored;  soiling  only.  The  produce  is  sold  to  the  men 
who  work  on  the  farm  in  the  form  of  milk  and  butter  and  the  men 
pay  4  cents  a  quart  for  the  milk  and  carry  it  themselves.  The 
butter  is  sold  to  the  employees  for  twenty  cents  a  pound  the  year 
round,  the  little  we  have.  We  do  not  have  very  much  butter ;  it  is 
mostly  sold  in  the  milk.  Only  the  surplus  is  made  into  butter. 
We  keep  the  yield  of  the  cow  that  went  through  the  full  year  and 
the  cost  of  production  for  each  individual  cow.  I  do  not  think 
our  cost  of  production  here  exceeds  the  food  cost  of  the  ordinary 
dairy  farm  in  the  State.  The  cows  are  fed  with  silage;  they  eat 
silage  the  year  round  practically,  some  green  food.  They  average 
about  7,000  pounds  of  5.8  milk;  about  470  pounds  of  butter-fat. 
That  would  make  about  470  pounds  of  butter.  It  costs  us  about 
$1  per  hundred  pounds  to  produce  that  milk  for  food  alone.  That 
is  figured  on  the  basis  of  $3  a  ton  for  silage  and  $10  a  ton  for  hay, 
and  the  grain  at  what  we  paid  for  it.  The  hay  is  figured  at  $10 
a  ton  in  the  barn.  This  is  as  much  as  hay  will  average  to  the 
fanner,  as  a  rule.  If  you  take  the  average  cost  of  his  pressing 
and  delivering,  he  does  not  get  net  out  of  hay  much  more  than  $10. 
Last  year  perhaps  he  did,  but  not  the  average  year,  at  the  barn. 
The  average  hay  will  not  bring  $15  per  ton  at  the  barn  year  by 
year  for  a  period  of  years.  The  depreciation  and  interest  on  a 
cow  over  the  period  of  the  last  eight  years,  taking  a  cow  that  is 
worth  $100,  would  be,  as  we  compute  it,  $13  per  year,  per  cow ; 
interest,  insurance  and  repairs  combined,  about  $15  per  cow.  Bull 
service,  $5.40  per  annum,  per  cow;  bedding  $5  per  cow;  coal, 
water,  cleaning  out  utensils  at  the  barn,  $1.84  per  cow ;  ice  and 
water  for  cooling  the  milk  $3.86  per  cow;  distributing  the  milk, 
$4.90  per  cow.  That  means  the  man  that  takes  care  of  the  milk 
and  distributes  the  milk,  his  wages  cost  $4.90  per  cow,  per  year. 
It  would  not  be  quite  so  much  as  the  hauling  charge.  Washing 
out  utensils,  $6.17  per  cow;  depreciation  on  utensils,  $1  per  cow; 
tests  and  veterinary  service,  $2.50  per  cow,  making  the  expenses, 
outside  of  food  and  labor,  $57.67.  The  milk  here  at  the  station, 
our  own  labor  cost  and  everything  on  the  production  of  3,000 
quarts  per  cow,  cost  $0.0496  per  quart.  Labor  in  our  case  would 
not  be  r applicable;  to  most  cases,  because  it  costs  more.  We 


103 

credited  the  cows  $35  each  for  the  manure  and  calf.  Our  overhead 
and  food  cost  was  $86  per  cow  practically,  per  year.  I  haven't 
put  the  labor  item  in.  The  labor  item  was  $60  per  cow,  but  that 
is  not  typical  of  the  average  dairy  farm.  The  $86  cost  of  food 
and  overhead  expense  would  fairly  compare  with  the  average  well- 
conducted  farm.  From  checking  up  the  matter  with  a  good  many 
farmers,  I  estimate  the  labor  cost  per  cow  to  be  $27.40.  This 
would  make  the  cost  of  carrying  the  average  dairy  cow  for  a  year 
$113.46.  As  I  figure  this  year,  I  made  their  food  cost  the  same  as 
ours  last  year,  $61.30;  their  labor,  $27.20;  their  other  expenses, 
$30,  and  credit  manure  and  calf,  $18.  That  makes  milk  cost  on 
the  basis  of  4  cents  a  quart.  That  is  the  correct  approximation  of 
the  cost  of  producing  milk  here  in  1915.  We  get  our  food  prac- 
tically at  carload  rates  through  the  dealer.  We  cannot  tell 
whether  the  dealers  give  all  the  farmers  the  same  privilege  or  not. 
We  paid  $29  for  distiller's  grain  here  a  short  time  ago,  I  think 
the  latter  part  of  June.  I  understood  that  to  be  the  price  of 
distiller's  grains  in  carload  lots.  I  got  the  quotations  from  the 
wholesalers  and  we  paid  him  25  cents  a  ton  for  his  part  of  the  job 
and  we  took  it  from  the  car. 

Mr.  Ward.  —  We  find  that  the  average  dairyman  is  paying  $5 
and  $6  a  ton  for  his  feed  over  the  wholesale  cost. 


Mr.  Smith.  —  ^ot  if  he  pays  cash. 

Mr.  Ward.  —  Yes,  we  find  him  paying  cash  and  paying  that  in 
many  cases  to-day  and  yesterday  and  all  last  year.  I  don't  see 
how  you  have  escaped  the  attention  of  the  Feed  Dealers'  Associa- 
tion on  the  ground  that  you  were  illegitimate  in  your  dealings. 

Mr.  Jordan.  —  We  inspect  the  goods  sent  out  by  the  dealers  ; 
maybe  that  is  the  way  we  escaped. 

Mr.  Smith.  —  We  negotiate  the  arrangement  with  the  local 
dealer  by  which  he  furnishes  this  grain.  The  arrangement  is  that 
we  pay  him  25  cents  a  ton  over  the  price  that  he  pays  by  the  car- 
load. We  buy  wheat  bran  and  our  last  price  was  $22.50  a  ton. 
We  do  not  buy  any  mixed  dairy  foods;  we  can  do  our  mixing 
cheaper  than  paying  the  mill  man  to  mix  it.  We  mix  a  ration  as 
follows:  300  pounds  of  bran;  200  pounds  of  dry  distiller's  grain; 


104 


150  pounds  of  gluten;  150  pounds  of  cottonseed  meal,  and  150 

pounds  of  corn  meal.     That  mixture  cost  us  last  month  $1.50  per 

hundred  pounds,  practically  $30  a  ton.  Most  mixed  dairy  foods 

cost  $35  and  $36  a  ton,  wholesale.     Exhibit  156  shows  the  food 

cost  and  milk  production  of  this  herd  on  the  units,  taking  the 
prices  I  have  given." 

EXHIBIT  No.  156 

Milk  Fat  Butter  Food 

25  cows,   1915                                              Ibs.  percent,  fat, Ibs.  cost 

Dotshome   Carey    6,639  5.1  339  $63  15 

Carey   Blue   Belle 7,542  6. 16  464.2  60  07 

Carey  S.  Blue  Belle   8,361  6.37  533 . 2  62  95 

Carey  S.  Fancy   8,481.5  6.03  511.4  6534 

Carey   Fairy  Queen    7,795  6 .28  490  58  57 

Carey  S.  B.  B.  Princess   6,162  5.97  367.9  67  52 

Oxford  Carey  F.  B.  B 6,521  5.73  373  5788 

Oxford  B.  B.  Carey,  2  yrs.  old 6,393  6 . 07  388  65  50 

Carey  F.  B.  B.  Princess 5,312  6.75  358  63  88 

Oxford  Carey  B.  B 5,332  5 . 70  320  65  75 

Oxford  Carey  Lady  Belle,  2  yrs.  old.        5,731  6.08  348  63  74 

Oxford  Carey  F.  B.  B 5,664  5 . 82  329  59  07 

Dotshome  Carey  B.  B.,  3  yrs.  old..        3,805  6.33  241  6005 

Gold  Fern  Carey  F.  Queen,  2  yrs.  old        4,509  6.19  279  59  99 

Millie  Fancy    8,668  5.23  453.2  6581 

Millie  of  Geneva 5,746  5.39  309  63  91 

Millie  D.  of  S.  B.  B 6,884  6.29  433  6660 

Millie  E.  of  S.  B.  B.  No.  2 8,110  5.79  470  6777 

Millie  G.  B.  B 6,521  6.66  434.6  6510 

Millie  F.  B.  B 8,035  5 . 93  476  67  58 

Millie  F.  B.  B.  Lady 6,624  5.74  380  61  39 

Oxford  Millie  D.  B.  B 6,313  6.07  383  6824 

Hammond  F.  No.   1 11,534  5.21  601  6341 

Hammond  F.  No.  2 8,183  5.43  444  5881 

Gertie  F.  No.  1,  B.  B '7,922  6.44  510  6278 

Average 6,919  5 . 86  409  $63  39 


AN  EXAMPLE  OF  CERTIFIED  MILK  COSTS 

The  Committee  was  fortunate  in  getting  an  accurate  and  com- 
plete cost  account  for  the  period  from  April  1,  1914,  to  March  81, 
1915,  kept  by  the  Markam  and  Puffer  farm  of  400  acres  at  Avon, 
K  Y. 

Mr.  G.  R.  OLGIVIE,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  am  secretary  for  the  Markham  and  Puffer  farm  in  the  certi- 
fied milk  business  at  Avon  in  the  town  of  West  Rush,  Monroe 
county.  We  have  a  mixed  herd  of  75  cows,  Hoist eins,  Guernseys 
and  grades.  We  produce  certified  milk  under  the  supervision  of 


105 


the  Milk  Commission.  We  must  have  first  a  tuberculin  test  of  the 
cows;  clean  stables  and  barns,  as  well  as  over  head.  We  must 
bottle  the  milk  in  the  barn  in  sterilized  bottles  and  ship  it  in  the 
original  bottles  packed  in  ice.  The  cows  must  be  curried,  brushed 
and  washed  twice  daily  and  the  udder  washed  just  before  milking 
with  a  sterilized  cloth.  We  use  an  individual  cloth  for  each 
cow.  The  milker  must  wear  a  clean  white  suit  and  wash  his 
hands  before  milking  each  cow.  The  milk  must  be  cooled  promptly 
to  not  less  than  45  degrees  and  bottled  immediately.  That  is 
the  usual  requirement  for  certified  milk.  The  cows  are  not  pas- 
tured. I  have  the  cost  figures  of  our  herd  here  for  the  period 
from  April  1,  1914,  to  March  31,  1915,  marked  Exhibit  ISTo.  159. 

EXHIBIT  No.  159 

CONDENSED   STATEMENT,   APRIL    1,    1914  —  MARCH   31,    1915 
Revenue 

Milk   sold    $15,333  02          197,071  qts.          .08c. 

Milk  sold    1,032  40  17,206  qts.          .063c. 

Calves  sold    187  00 

Increase  in  value  of  herd 1,355  00 

Manure 1,000  00 

$18,907  42 

Expense 

Labor,  cow  barn    $3,011  41 

Labor,  bot.  R 1,252  58 

B.   R.   exp , 2,195  88 

Milk  comm 435  01 

Cow  expense   15,785  10 

Caps  and  rings    342  70 

Laundry 103  47 

Breakage 10  22 

Repairs 360  62 

Freight 1,422  69 

Incidentals 155  65 

Ice 316  71 

$25,392  04 

Actual  loss  per  year   $6,484  62 

Deducting  all  overhead   3,357  96 

Shows   loss    $3,126  66 

Analysis  of  Cow  Expense 

Grain $3,592  08 

Hay 2,834  83 

Ensilage 1,960  00 

Roots 327  50 

Loss  on  cattle  sold    1,259  11 

T.   B.  369  21 


106 

Bedding $474  75 

Veterinarian 103  50 

£rug8 244  76 

•Toola 86  89 

A.  R,  D 83  97 

Rent 800  00 

Depreciation 15605  40 

Light 87  34 

Interest.  .  .  .    518  10 

Office 398  00 

Manager 734  34 

Water 109  76 

Pasture 121  81 

Miscellaneous 23  65 


$15,785  10 

Milk  produced,  214,277  quarts;  556  quarts  per  day. 

Average  price  received,  .0925;  price  to  January  20,  1915,  8c.;  then  lOc. 

Average  cost  with  O.  EL,  .1243. 

Average  cost  without  O.  H.,  .1098. 

Feed  Prices 

Mixed  hay   $14  00 

Alfalfa 18  00 

Ensilage 4  00 

Roots,  bushel 25 

Schumacher 29  00 

Bran 26  00 

Ajax 32  50 

Umiorm 31  25 

Gluten 30  70 

Oil  meal    34  50 

Hominy.  ...            34  50 

G.  oats   36  35 


Cows  purchased  24;  cost,  $3,995. 

Mr.  Olgivie. —  The  average  cost  per  cow  was  $160.  That  is, 
the  labor  cost  and  food,  but  it  does  not  include  the  bottling  of  the 
milk,  just  the  labor  of  taking  care  of  the  cow,  milking  and  feed- 
ing her  and  the  provision  she  had.  We  carry  $800  barn  rent  for 
64  cows.  It  runs  about  $12  per  cow.  I  have  not  just  separated 
that.  The  expense  of  keeping  that  dairy  from  April,  1914,  to 
March,  1915,  was  $25,392.04;  that  is  including  depreciation 
charge  and  interest  charge  and  rent  Labor  in  the  cow  barn  was 
$3,011.41 ;  in  the  bottling  room,  $1,262.58.  The  bottling  room 
expense  was  $2,195.88.  The  Milk  Commission  charge  is  $435.01. 
That  is  what  we  had  to  pay  the  Milk  Commission  of  the  Monroe 
County  Medical  Association,  which,  in  return  for  that  they  certi- 
fied the  milk,  made  an  examination  of  the  milk  three  times  a  week. 
The  item  cows,  $15,785.10,  includes  keeping  the  cows,  their  depre- 
ciation, interest,  food,  etc.  The  item,  roots,  $327.50,  was  for  man- 


107 

gels;  means  root  feed.  The  item  "  T.  B.,"  $369.21,  is  loss  from 
reacting  cows  on  the  tuberculin  test.  The  item,  $103.50,  is  veteri- 
nary service;  the  item,  $244.10,  is  drugs  and  disinfectants.  The 
item,  "  A.  E.  D.,"  $83.99,  is  advanced  registry  work.  The  item, 
$800,  is  bam  and  silage  rental  valuation.  The  item  of  deprecia- 
tion, $1,605.40,  is  figured  at  20  per  cent  on  the  book  value  of  the 
herd.  Our  place  is  an  expensive  one.  We  buy  all  our  cattle  foods 
by  the  carload  despite  the  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association." 

CURTIS  F.  GIFFORD,  of  Wilson,  Niagara  county,  called  before 
the  Committee,  testified: 

"  I  had  seven  cows  in  1915  and  eight  in  1914.  I  figure  on 
shipping  two  cans  of  milk  a  day.  I  raised  184  bushels  of  wheat 
011  12  acres  this  year.  I  had  16  acres  last  year  and  raised  about 
350  bushels.  I  think  I  sold  it  last  year  for  $7  a  bushel  in  the 
fall.  Most  of  the  farmers  in  my  vicinity  have  a  field  of  wheat. 
Sometimes  on  real  good  land  we  will  get  as  high  as  40  bushels 
per  acre;  the  average  would  not  be  more  than  25  or  30.  We  use 
fertilizer  for  the  wheat,  about  200  pounds  per  acre;  cost  about 
$24  a  ton.  It  is  winter  wheat.  Beans  are  one  of  our  staple  crops. 
I  pay  a  man  $35  a  month  for  eight  months;  $25  a  month  for  four 
months,  furnishing  for  him  a  house  to  live  in,  20  bushels  of  pota- 
toes and  either  keep  a  cow  for  him  or  give  him  a  quart  of  milk 
and  a  garden  spot;  a  horse  to  use  when  it  is  necessary.  Day  wages 
are  $1.50  per  day  and  board.  This  man  boards  himself.  The 
dairy  consists  of  two  full  bloods,  three  grades  and  two  heifers, 
Holsteins.  I  have  figures  for  the  year  ending  September  27,  1916, 
from  September  to  September.  I  sell  this  milk  for  17  cents  a 
gallon.  I  sold  5,840  gallons.  I  received  from  the  herd  $1,248. 
That  was  from  the  milk  and  the  calves  I  raised  and  the  milk  we 
used  in  the  house.  I  credit  the  dairy  with  $130  increase;  $75  for 
the  manure.  That  gave  me  $1,248  on  the  credit  side.  Expenses : 
Grain  bought,  $240 ;  67  tons  of  silage  at  $6  a  ton,  $402 ;  hay,  $120 ; 
miscellaneous,  $8 ;  pasture,  $140.  Pasture  is  worth  that  here. 
Labor,  1  man,  3  hours  a  day,  at  15  cents  an  hour,  $164;  hauling, 
$91;  insurance,  repairs,  depreciation  and  interest,  $100;  interest 
on  stock  and  food,  $46 ;  veterinary,  $5 ;  dairy  supplies  and  ice, 
$22 ;  freight  on  milk,  $91.  We  ship  the  milk  in  eight-gallon  cans 


108 

to  Niagara  Falls  on  the  R.  W.  &  O.  Thirty  tickets  cost  us  $3.78 ; 
one  ticket  will  carry  each  eight-gallon  can.  The  bull  service  cost 
$15.  The  total  herd  cost  was  $1,497,  and  the  total  herd  returns 
were  $1,248,  and  that  only  included  3  hours  per  day  at  15  cents 
an  hour  for  taking  care  of  them.  The  milk  cost  me  21  cents  a  gal- 
lon on  these  figures,  and  I  sold  it  for  17." 

F.  S.  MAEKHAM,  of  Port  Leyden,  K  Y.,  testified  as  follows: 

"  I  have  kept  the  cost  of  production  on  my  farm  with  20  cows 
for  the  past  year.    I  have  set  it  down  in  Exhibit  189. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  189 

PRODUCTION  COSTS  —  20  Cows 

Dr. 

Feed  (hay  and  grain)    (15T-grain) $1,000 

Labor  (35  T.  hay) 805 

Interest  on  money  invested  on  cows 100 

Depreciation  of  cows   (losses) 200 

Insurance  on  cows  and  barn 25 

Taxes   on   cows  and  barn 

Bedding 100 

Keep  of  bull 50 

Barn  rent   250 

Light,  medicine,  veterinarian  and  ice 50 

Heating  water  in  winter 10 

$2,590 


(Jr. 

Milk  produced    $2,440 

Value  of  manure 100 

Value  of  calves 250 


$2,790 

Raised  eleven  heifer  and  bull  calves-;  sold  and  estimated  at  $250. 

All  the  cost  of  labor  is  not  included  in  this  memoranda  of  estimated  costs 
which  is  very  close  to  the  actual  production  costs  but  I  have  purposely  kept 
out  the  salary  of  the  man  I  hire  by  the  year  to  take  my  place  so  far  as 
the  physical  labor  part,  counting  the  work  I  do  as  nothing.  So  that  the 
above  would  be  the  same  as  if  I  were  working  on  the  farm  and  getting  my 
wage  out  of  the  net  profits. 


109 

Results 

Gross  income,   one   year $2,790 

Gross  expenses,  one  year ,  2,590 

Profit $200 

Salary  of  man,  one  year $520 

Expenses,  one  year 2,590 

Actual  expense,  one  year $3,310 

Gross  receipts,  one  year 2,790 

Loss $520 


The  silage  has  not  been  figured  at  what  it  is  worth,  just  the  cost  of  labor 
to  grow  and  cut  it  into  the  silo,  so  that  it  would  be  worth  at  least  $3  a 
ton  over  and  above  the  cost  of  placing  it  in  silo. 

The  twenty  cows  were  fed  about  80  tons,  at  $3  per  ton  would  make  an 
additional  cost  in  the  production  of  milk  of 


The   other   expenses $2,590 


$2,830 
Gross  receipts    2,790 


Loss $40 


Number  of  pounds  of  milk  produced,  162,457. 

Average  per  cow,  8,122.8  pounds. 

Average  price  paid  at  station  per  hundred  pounds,  $1.522. 

Average  cost  to  produce,  per  hundred  pounds,  $1.74. 

The  average  cost  of  milk  production  in  Montgomery  county  is 
attempted  to  be  shown  in  Exhibit  197,  offered  in  evidence  before 

the  Committee. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  197 

AVEEAGE  COST  MILK  PRODUCTION  PER  Cow  ON  26  DAIRIES  IN  MONTGOMERY 

COUNTY 

Pounds  milk  sold 5,896 

Average  price  per  100  pounds $1  46 

Receipts 


Value  other  milk                                     

3  19 

Value  calf  and  manure                             

14  85 

$102  87 

Costs 
Bull   service    

$2  12 

Bedding.  . 

1  62 

Labor  on  milking 

28  83 

Dairy  equipment 

1  09 

Buildings.  . 

901 

110 

Miscellaneous ' $2  99 

Hauling  milk   11  15 

Interest  on  cow  investment 3  44 

Feed   costs    64  38 


$124  63 

Loss  per  cow,  464  cows $21  76 

Cost  to  produce  100  pounds  milk 2  00 


ALLEN  S.  MERCHANT,  Farm  Bureau  Manager,  of  Montgom- 
ery county,  who  furnished  the  above  computation,  testified : 

The  cost  to  produce  milk  on  the  26  farms  was  as  follows: 


Herd  No.     1  

$1  37  per  hundred  pounds 

Herd  No.     2  

2  15 

Herd  No.     3  

1  73 

Herd  No.     4  

2  48 

Herd  No.     5  

1  47 

Herd  No.     6  

2  43 

Herd  No.     7  

2  48 

Herd  No.     8  

1  29 

Herd  No.     9  

2  18 

Herd  No.  10  

2  26 

Herd  No.  11  

2  81 

Herd  No.  12  

1  67 

Herd  No.  13  

1  94 

Herd  No.  14  

1  69 

Herd  No.  15  

2  41 

Herd  No.  16  

1  55 

Herd  No.  17  

1  46 

Herd  No.  18  

3  58 

Herd  No.  19  

2  34 

Herd  No.  20  

2  04 

Herd  No.  21  

2  80 

Herd  No.  22  

1  97 

Herd  No.  23  

2  05 

Herd  No.  24  

1  34 

Herd  No.  25  

1  38 

Herd  No.  26  

2  16 

Only  herds  Nos.  8,  17,  23,  24  and  25  showed  a  profit. 

No.  8  had  total  dairy  costs  of  $1,448.40  and  credited  the  manure  and  calves 
at  $225.  The  herd  consisted  of  fifteen  cows  and  gave  the  following  items 
of  cost: 

Feed  cost    $795  00 

Interest 60  00 

Hauling 109  50 

Miscellaneous 

Buildings 

Equipment 

Labo? 254  80 

Bedding 

Bull  service   •  •  •  • ^ 

Herd  No.  24,  with  seventeen  cows,  sold  the  milk  for  $1.54  per  hundred- 
weight. Produced  149,053  pounds,  as  against  95,025  pounds  produced  by 
Herd  No.  8,  which  was  sold  for  $1.39  per  hundredweight.  Herd  No.  24  had 
the  following  items  of  expense: 


Ill 


Bull  service    $34  75 

Bedding : .  32  00 

Labor 509  60 

Dairy  equipment   12  00 

Building 148  00 

Miscellaneous 6  00 

Hauling 327  17 

Interest  on  cow  investment 70  00 

Feed  cost    1,109  00 


Total  cost   $2,248  52 

Credit  for  manure  and  calves . .  252  00 


Net  cost    $1,996  52 


Cost  to  produce  milk $1  34 

Profit.  .  381  05 


Herd  No.   1   had  twenty  cows.     The  total  amount   of  milk  produced  was 

137,627  pounds,  which  averaged  $1.46  per  hundredweight.  The  milk  receipts 

were  $1,815.90.     Other  credits  brought  the  total  value  of  milk  to  $1,849.10. 
Expenses  were  as  follows: 

Bull  service    $35  00 

Bedding 30  00 

Labor 655  20 

Dairy  equipment   18  55 

Buildings 157  50 

Miscellaneous 50  00 

Hauling  milk    273  50 

Interest  on  cow  investment 75  00 

Feed  costs    928  00 


Total  cost  $2,222  75 

Credit  manure  and  calf 340  00 


Net  cost $1,882  75 


Cost  100  pounds  of  milk $1  37 

Net  loss    37  65 


Dairy  No.  5,  of  35  cows,  had  the  following  statement: 

Total  amount   of   milk,  220,873  pounds;   average   sale  price,  $1.50.     Total 
receipts  for  milk,  $3,234.10. 

Expenses 

Bull  service    $73  00 

Bedding 80  00 

Labor 764  40 

Dairy  equipment  16  00 

Buildings 424  00 

Miscellaneous 69  00 

Hauling  milk   216  00 

Interest   on  cow   investment 140  00 

Feed  cost    2,062  00 


Total  costs $3,844  40 

Credit  manure  and  calves 595  00 


Net  cost    $3,249  40 

Cost  to  produce  milk $1  47 

Net  loss    .  15  30 


112 

Dairy  No.  15,  of  30  cows,  produced  156,629  pounds  of  milk,  which  sold 
for  an  average  price  of  $1.64  per  hundred  pounds.  Total  value  of  the  milk 
was  $2,433.58.  Expenses  are  as  follows: 

Bull  service    $38  00 

Bedding 25  00 

Labor  of  milking 655  20 

Dairy  equipment  65  75 

Building  rent   222  00 

Miscellaneous-.  . 72  00 

Hauling  milk   456  25 

Interest  on  cow  investment 90  00 

Feed  cost    2,569  00 


Total  cost    $4,193  20 

Value  of  manure  and  calves 415  00 


Net  cost    $3,778  20 

Cost  to  produce  per  hundred  weight $2  41 

Net  loss    1,354  67 


When  the  difference  in  the  quantity  of  milk  produced  in  dairies  Nos.  5  and 
15  are  compared,  the  difference  in  results  will  not  be  so  alarming.  The 
amount  of  production  in  these  records  is  generally  accurate.  A  comparison 
of  dairy  production  is  sometimes  interesting.  For  instance,  in  this  survey, 
dairy  No.  1,  of  20  cows,  sold  137,627  pounds  of  milk  at  $1.46  per  hundred- 
weight; dairy  No.  13,  of  20  cows,  sold  95,301  pounds  of  milk  at  an  average 
price  of  $1.35  per  hundredweight;  dairy  No.  17,  of  20  cows,  sold  130,652 
pounds  of  milk  at  an  average  price  of  $1.66  per  hundredweight;  dairy  No.  21, 
of  20  cows,  sold  108,796  pounds  of  milk  at  an  average  price  of  $1.71  per 
hundredweight. 

The  profitableness  of  the  dairy  business,  according  to  this  Mont- 
gomery County  survey,  as  compared  with  other  forms  of  agricul- 
tural income,  is  shown  by  Exhibit  196,  computed  by  Mr.  Mer- 
chant : 

Twelve  farms  where  the  per  cent,  of  milk  receipts  were  50  per  cent,  or 
less  of  the  total  farm  receipts.  The  per  cent,  of  receipts  from  crops 
averaged  23%  per  cent,  of  total  farm  receipts. 


113 

Per  cent,  receipts     Per  cent,  receipts 

Farm  No.  from  crops  from  milk         Labor  income 

1-8 29  34  $847 

1-0 12  43  1,841 

5-6 46  33                              892 

2-24.... 48  35  1,561 

2-23 43  40                              739 

4-2 15  50                             656 

2-7 16  48  2,012 

3-1 0  44  1,017 

3-7 37  48  3,511 

2-15 19  49  1,135 

2-0 14  27  1,377 

6-15..  2  48                             734 


Total 281  499  $16,922 


Average 23M>%  41^%  $1,402 


Per  cent,  receipts     Per  cent,  receipts 

Farm  No.                                           from  crops  from  milk         Labor  income 

2-9 8  68  $23 

6-19 0  67  -91 

2-29 1  85  257 

1-6 1  82  -312 

2-22 1  77  48 

2-16 14  73  -317 

2-8 12  81  414 

5-1 0  99  -485 

6-16 0  76  393 

6-11 9  64  •                          22 

6-12 0  86  118 

6-7..  0  80  162 


Total .  .  46  938  $232 


Average 4%  78%  $19  33 


Mr.  Merchant  produces  and  offers  in  evidence  Exhibit  E"o.  198, 
a  statement  of  the  methods  used  in  obtaining  the  foregoing  figures. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  198 
METHODS  USED  IN  DETERMINING  THE  COST  OF  MILK  PRODUCTION 

Total  Milk  Receipts 
Total  Amount  of  Milk,  Average  price,  and  milk  receipts: 

These  figures  were  obtained  either  from  the  farmer's  record  account  book 
or  from  milk  slips  he  received  from  his  milk  station,  or  from  the  books  at 
the  milk  station  where  he  delivered  his  milk.  Hence,  these  figures  are  correct. 
Value  of  Other  Milk: 

These  figures  were  determined  from  the  farmer's  estimate  which  included 
the  amount  of  milk  for  household  use  which  was  figured  at  four  cents  a 
quart,  and  the  amount  of  milk  fed  to  calves  raised  on  the  farm  or  sold  as 
veals.  The  value  of  the  latter  milk  was  figured  at  market  prices. 


114 

Cost  of  Milk  Production 
Bull  'Service: 

A  uniform  charge  of  $36  was  made  for  the  keeping  of  a  bull  one  year. 
Interest  on  the  value  of  the  bull  was  figured  at  five  per  cent.  A  credit  of 
$5  was  allowed  for  the  value  of  the  manure.  From  these  figures  the  cost  of 
keeping  a  bull  for  one  year  were  determined. 

Bedding: 

On  most  farms,  oat  straw  was  used  for  bedding.  The  value  of  the  straw 
or  whatever  material  was  used,  was  estimated  by  the  farmer  at  what  it  was 
worth  in  the  barn.  In  most  cases,  oat  straw  was-  valued  at  $4  per  ton. 

Labor  on  Milking: 

The  farmer  gave  the  number  of  hours  required  daily  to  get  his  cows 
from  the  field,  put  them  in  the  stable,  do  the  milking,  turn  the  cows  out 
again,  during  six  months  of  summer.  The  farmer  also  estimated  the  number 
of  hours1  required  daily  to  milk  the  cows  during  the  six  months  of  winter. 
Estimate  was  also  given  on  the  amount  of  time  required  to  feed  the  cows, 
water  them,  clean  the  stables,  clean  the  cows  and  any  other  stable  work 
pertaining  to  the  care  of  the  cows  during  the  winter  six  months.  The  value  of 
this  time  was  figured  at  twenty  cents  per  hour  to  determine  the  cost  of  labor 
on  milking  and  care  of  the  cows. 

Dairy  Equipment: 

This  item  includes  the  interest  on  the  investment  in  cans,  pails,  strainer, 
cooler,  milk  wagon,  etc.,  at  five  per  cent,  and  depreciation  and  repairs  on  the 
above  mentioned  tools.  This  cost  item  is  usually  small  on  account  of  the 
small  investment. 

Buildings: 

Interest  on  the  present  value  of  the  barn  used  for  the  housing  of  cows,  the 
feed  and  forage  necessary  to  keep  the  cows,  was  figured  at  five  per  cent. 
Average  depreciation  and  insurance  were  added  to  the  interest  account, 
making  the  total  cost  of  buildings. 

Miscellaneous : 

This  item  included  insurance  on  stock,  medicine,  veterinary  fees,  fly  pro- 
tectors, stock  foods,  ice,  feed,  grinding,  etc. 

Hauling  Milk: 

The  time  required  by  a  farmer  to  haul  the  milk  to  the  milk  station  was 
figured  at  twenty  cents  per  hour  for  the  man  and  fifteen  cents  per  hour  for 
each  horse  used.  No  charge  was  made  for  the  wagon,  as  this  was  figured  in 
under  dairy  equipment. 
Interest  on  Cow  Investment: 

Interest  at  five  per  cent,  was  figured  on  the  farmer's  estimate  of  what  hia 
cows  would  sell  for  if  put  up  at  public  auction. 

Feed  Costs: 

This  item  included  the  cost  of  purchased  foods,  which  was-  usually  obtained 
very  accurately.  It  also  includes  the  value  of  farm  grown  grain  and  forage 
fed  to  the  cows.  The  estimates  given  by  the  farmer  at  what  the  hay  would 
sell  for  in  the  barn  and  silage  was  in  all  cases  figured  at  $4  per  ton. 

The  sum  of  the  above  cost  items  give  the  total  costs. 


115 

Value  of  Manure  and  Calf: 

The  farmer  gave  the  value  of  calves  at  three  days  old.    Manure  was  valued 
at  $10  per  year  for  each  cow.     The  value  of  calf  and  manure,  deducted  from 
the  total  costs,  give  the  net  cost. 
Profit  and  Loss: 

There  were  26  Milk  Survey  Records  taken.  The  records  of  four  farms 
showed  a  profit  and  22  farms  showed  a  loss.  The  average  loss  per  farm  was 
$411.72,  which  was  determined  by  dividing  the  difference  between  the  profit 
on  the  four  farms  from  the  loss  on  the  22  farms  by  the  26  dairies. 

EUGENE  ARTHUR  called  before  the  Committee,  testified: 

"  I  live  in  the  village  of  Lowville.  I  am  in  the  grain  and 
coal  business.  I  have  made  a  balance  sheet  of  the  Aratage  farm 
for  the  year  July  1,  1915,  to  July  1,  1916.  We  have  270  acres 
in  the  main  farm  and  100  acres  in  the  pasture  lot.  Forty  cows 
were  milked  during  the  period.  The  farm  is  absolutely  devoted  to 
dairying.  These  cows  average  over  7,600  pounds  of  milk  apiece. 
They  are  thoroughbred  Holsteins.  It  cost  us  to  produce  100 
pounds  of  milk  on  that  farm  $2.15  per  hundredweight.  We  sold 
the  milk  for  $1.47  per  hundredweight.  The  40  cows  produced 
305,286  pounds  of  milk,  for  which  we  received  $4,505.29.  We 
bought  grain  and  feed  during  the  year,  $3,031.37,  but  we  sold 
$810.77  worth  of  oats,  leaving  the  net  cost  of  the  grain  and  feed 
$2,220.60.  We  also  fed  to  pigs  and  calves  $260  worth  of  grain, 
leaving  the  amount  of  grain  foods  chargeable  to  milk  production 
$1,960.60,  making  net  receipts  from  milk  $2,544.69.  The  balance 
sheet  for  the  farm  is  as  follows : 

Income 

Milk  receipts    $4,505  29 

Hay  and  straw   257  50 

Pork 100  07 

Nineteen  calves,  $15 285  00 

Grain  sales 810  77 


Total $5,958  63 


Interest  on  $17,500  at  six  per  cent $1,050  00 

Depreciation,  buildings,  equipment,  annual 200  00 

Depreciation  on  herd,  grade  basis,  ten  per  cent 300  00 

Depreciation  and  interest,  machinery,  horses  and  equipment,  ten 

per  cent 300  00 

Grain  purchased    3,031  37 

Lie*    and   fertilizer 58  20 

S*eds 90  37 

Ice.  .                                                                              16  00 


116 

Threshing 34  80 

Filling  silo    35  45 

Taxes 203  61 

Veterinary 55  00 

Insurance,  annual  43  00 

Labor,  three  men  and  two  women: 

First  man   780  00 

Second  man    600  00 

Third  man   540  00 

Two  women,  services 547  54 

Extra  labor,  haying,  harvesting,  cow  testing 75  00 


Total  expense    $7,960  30 

Net  loss  of  operation $2,001  61 

FAILURE  TO   USE   UNIFORM  FACTORS  IN   ASCERTAINING   LABOR 
COST  BY  Cow  TESTING  ASSOCIATIONS 

C.  A.  BOUTELLE,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified  that 
he  was  an  accountant  employed  in  connection  with  the  extension 
work  of  the  ISTew  York  State  College  of  Agriculture,  etc.  He  had 
made  a  computation  and  schedule.  He  had  compiled  a  schedule  of 
the  records  of  four  cow  testing  associations  in  Wyoming  county, 
viz. :  Warsaw  Association,  Attica  Association,  Perry  Pike  and 
Gainesville  Association,  and  the  Java  Association.  Those  records 
show  labor  costs  as  follows: 

Warsaw  Association 

Herd  No.  1  —  20  cows $462  60 

Herd  No.  2  —    9  cows 332  40 

Herd  No.  3  —  14  cows 410  70 

Herd  No.  4  —    8  cows 220  35 

Herd  No.  5  —  10  cows 318  60 

Herd  No.  6  —    6  cows 273  90 

Herd  No.  7—17  cows 784  30 

Herd  No.  8—9  cows..  191  55 


Attica  Association 

Herd  No.     1  —  15   cows $209  55 

Herd  No.     2—15  cows 291  60 

Herd  No.     3  —  20   cows 291  75 

Herd  No.     4  —  16   cows 264  15 

Herd  No.     5  —  15   cows 218  70 

Herd  No.     6—8  cows 246  00 

Herd  No.     7  —    9   cows 20955 

Herd  No.     8  —  13  cows 291  90 

Herd  No.     9  —  20   cows 313  80 

Herd  No.  10  —  17  cows..  328  20 


117 


Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 


—  11 
12 

32 

18 
18 


Perry  Pike  and  Gainesville  Association 

21   cows 

29  cows 

14  cows 

16  cows 

27  cows 

cows. . 


10  — 


cows, 
cows . 
cows, 
cows. 


$437  40 
465  45 
291  60 
319  20 
465  00 
225  85 
223  25 
897  96 
448  88 
259  95 


Java  Association 


No. 
No. 
No. 


Herd 
Herd 
Herd 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 

Herd  No. 


21 
14 
14 
15 
16 
14 
14 
7 


cows. 

cows . 

cows. 

cows . 

cows. 

cows. 

cows. 

cows. 
18  cows. 
18  cows. 


$519  45 
223  50 
223  50 
246  30 
232  80 
264  60 
264  60 
182  25 
492  30 
492  30 


To  bring  about  in  the  same  community  such  wide  variation  in 
labor  cost  would  be  extremely  difficult.  It  would  seem  to  be  a  fair 
conclusion  that  the  actual  cost  per  cow  unit  in  the  dairies  in  ques- 
tion would  be  very  nearly  uniform,  provided  that  the  costs  were 
thoroughly  analyzed  and  uniform  factors  used  in  each  dairy. 
Similar  variations  appear  in  the  cow  testing  association  results  as 
to  total  cost  of  feed  in  the  four  associations  mentioned,  which  are 
given  as  follows: 

Warsaw  Association 


Herd 

No 

1 

—  20 

cows  

$1  293 

00 

Herd 

No 

8 

—    9 

cows  

410 

Ot» 

Herd 

No 

8 

—  14 

cows  

704 

77 

Herd 

No 

4 

—    8 

cows  

334 

00 

Herd 

No 

5 

—  10 

cows       

469 

fil 

Herd 

No. 

C, 

—    6 

cows 

256 

87 

Herd 

No, 

7 

-17 

cows  

859 

53 

Hprd 

No 

8 

—    9 

cows  

349 

01 

Attica  Association 


Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 
Herd  No. 


1  —  15 
2—15 
3  —  20 
4—16 
5  —  15 

6—  8 

7—  9 
8—13 
9  —  20 

10  —  17 


cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 

cows 1,007  31 

cows 1,090  58 


$764  98 
681  82 
761  25 
770  39 
980  33 
489  33 
534  78 
784  94 


118 

These  variations  cannot  be  accounted  for  by  the  milk  produc- 
tion, as  the  same  schedule  (Exhibit  189)  shows  the  following  milk 
productions : 

Warsaw  Association 
Herd  No.      1  —  20   cows 138,544  Ibs.  of  milk 


Attica  Association 

Herd  No.      9  —  20   cows 131,883  Ibs.  of  milk 

Herd   No.    10  —  17    cows 116,532  Ibs.  of  milk 

Perry  Pike  and  Gainesville  Association  Value  of 

product 
as  sold 

Herd  No.   1  —  21   cows $1,664  96 

Herd  No.  2  —  29  cows 1,294  43 

NOTE. —  In  this  case,  however,  the  21  cows  in  Herd  No.  1  produced  165,445 
Ibs.  of  milk,  while  the  29  cows  in  Herd  No.  2  produced  only  125,380  Ibs.  of 
milk. 

Herd  No.   3  —  14  cows $584  90 

Herd  No.  4  —  16  cows 745  29 

Herd  No.  5  —  27  cows 1,179  00 


NOTE. —  This  herd  produced  126,064  Ibs.  of  milk. 

Herd  No.     6  —  11   cows $407  82 

Herd  No.     7—12   cows 461  64 

Herd  No.     8  —  32  cows 1,374  98 

Herd  No.     9—18   cows 799  98 

Herd  No.   10—  18  cows 1,008  78 


NOTE. —  In  this  Association,  Herd  No.  10  produced  15,000  Ibs.  of  milk  more 
than  Herd  No.  9,  which  at  the  sale  price  netted  $186.00,  whereas  the  excess 
cost  in  feed  was  $208.60;  but  the  figures  further  show  that  Herd  No.  9  pro- 
duced milk  at  a  cost  of  $1.17  per  hundred  pounds,  while  it  cost  Herd  No.  10 
$1.31  per  hundred  pounds. 

Java  Association 

Herd  No.     1  —  21   cows $1,090  00 

Herd  No.     2  —  14  cows 603  70 

Herd  No.     3  —  14  cows 691  71 

Herd  No.     4  —  15   cows 596  59 

Herd  No.     5  —  16  cows 463  01 

Herd  No.     6  —  14  cows 443  34 

Herd  No.     7  —  14  cows 558  75 

Herd  No.     8—7  cows 565  14 

Herd  No.     9—18  cows 811  42 

Herd  No.    10  —  18  cows 900  00 


119 


The  cost  of  producing  butter  fat  or  100  pounds  of  milk  as  shown 
by  the  records  of  these  associations  are  as  follows: 


Warsaw  Association 

Cost  of  1  Ib. 

of  butter  fat 

Herd  No.     1    .412 

Herd  No.     £    .310 

Herd  No.     3    .260 

Herd  No.     4    .313 

Herd  No.     5    .286 

Herd  No.     6    .613 

Herd  No.     7    .560 

Herd  No.     8    .330 

Attica  Association 

Herd  No.     1    .270 

Herd  No.     2    .397 

Herd  No.     3    .300 

Herd  No.     4    .330 

Herd  No.     5    .320 

Herd  No.     6    .  350 

Herd  No.     7    .397 

Herd  No.     8    .491 

Herd  No.     9    .240 

Herd  No.   10    .370 

Perry  Pike  and  Gainesville  Association 

Herd  No.     1    .386 

Herd  No.     2    .416 

Herd  No.     3    .390 

Herd  No.     4    .299 

Herd  No.     5    .334 

Herd  No.     6    .439 

Herd  No.     7    .372 

Herd  No.     8    .303 

Herd  No.     9    .230 

Herd  No.   10    .310 

Java  Association 

Herd  No.     1    .240 

Herd  No.     2    .370 

Herd  No.     3    .310 

Herd  No.     4    .330 

Herd  No.     5    .370 

Herd  No.     6    .330 

Herd  No.     7    .260 

Herd  No.     8    .310 

Herd  No.     9    .300 

Herd  No.   10    .  .320 


Cost  of  100 
Ibs.  of  milk 

$1  48 
1  44 
1  41 
1  75 

1  50 
3  03 

2  68 
1  81 


.997 

46 

23 

31 

17 

35 

78 

83 

1  01 

1  47 


$1  37 


1  40 
1  71 
1  15 
1  26 
1  72 
1  51 
1  14 
1  17 
1  31 


$1   19 


1   13 


32 
10 
24 
50 
33 
48 


120 

From,  these  varying  cost  computations  Mr.  Boiitelle  makes  up 
the  following  average  schedule : 

Expense  per  Average  Cow  Unit 

Services $1  51 

Bedding 351 

Labor 21  75 

Use  of  dairy  equipment 1  30 

Building  rentals    6  27 

Hauling  milk   5  11 

Miscellaneous 3  54 

Feed 48  55 

Interest.  .  3  39 


Total  expenses   $94  93 


These  cows  had  an  average  production  of  5,503  pounds  of  milk 
each,  but  averages  based  on  such  widely  varying  units  of  cost, 
especially  such  permanent  costs  as-  labor  in  the  same  community, 
and  at  the  same  period,  do  not  furnish  the  accurate  knowledge 
upon  actual  cost  of  production  that  is  desired.  The  depreciation 
in  the  dairy  cow  seems  not  to  have  been  considered  in  the  Wyoming 
account,  although  full  credit  is  given  for  the  manure  and  calf. 
Adapting  Doctor  Larson's  item  at  approximately  $6.00  per  cow 
for  depreciation  in  insurance  and  taxes,  would  bring  the  annual 
cost  of  one  of  these  cows  to  over  $100.00. 

CHAUTAUQUA  COUNTY  Cow  TESTING  ASSOCIATION  AVERAGES 

Testimony  before  the  Committee  as  to  the  value  of  the  product 
of  238  cows  of  the  Carroll  Cow  Testing  Association  in  Chautauqua 
county  during  the  period  from  April  1,  1915,  to  April  1,  1916, 
showrs  the  following  averages: 


Numb 
of  co\ 

24.  .  . 
39.  . 
39.  . 
42.  . 

58.  . 
39 

er                                          Average  value 
vs                                           of  product 
$52  67 

70  59 

89  34 

110  13 

,  132  46 

170  88 

6.  . 

214  35 

Some  of  these  cows  produced  as  high  as  9,000  pounds  per  annum. 
The  lowest  production  was  4,127  pounds. 


I 


121 

J.  B.  CRESWELL,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified  that 
he  lives  in  the  town  of  Stamford,  about  25  miles  from 
Poughkeepsie ;  has  a  dairy  farm  of  400  acres,  keeping  from 
30  to  40  grade  Holstein  dairy  cows: 

"  I  have  an  accurate  account  of  the  costs  for  two  years  which 
I  have  kept,  and  offer  in  evidence  (Exhibit  209  is  just  half  the 
figures  for  two  years).  I  got  the  average  for  the  yearly  state- 
ments. I  employ  two  men  regularly  besides  myself.  The  item  of 
$915.50  is  what  is  actually  paid  out  for  labor.  I  figure  my  own 
labor  $40.00  a  month  the  year  round.  I  work  the  year  round. 
I  paid  one  man  $35.00  a  month  and  the  other  $30.00.  I  pay  more 
now.  In  addition  he  gets  his  house,  free  milk  and  board,  garden, 
and  time  to  work  in  his  garden.  I  now  pay  one  of  these  men 
$38.00,  and  the  other  $35.00,  and  will  have  to  pay  more  next 
year.  We  are  five  miles  from  the  factory ;  go  there  every  day.  I 
have  charged  10  cents  a  hundred  for  delivery.  I  put  in  all  ex- 
penses because  our  farm  is  a  cow  farm.  Everything  we  do  is  for 
the  cows,  and  everything  we  get  from  the  cows  or  any  other  thing 
is  down  there.  My  net  loss  on  a  year's  business  was  $774.82.  I 
worked  the  farm  first  for  two  years  and  I  could  not  come  out  even." 

EXHIBIT  209 
COST  OF  MILK  TOR  12  MONTHS,  BASED  ON  COSTS  OF  YEARS  1912  AND  1913 

Expenses 

Hired  labor   $915  50 

Board,  one  man  for  eight  months 80  00 

Own   labor    480  00 

Delivering  milk    182  50 

Equipment  bought  and  repairs   83  47 

Horseshoeing 52  35 

Grinding 49  22 

Feed  bought  594  51 

Stock  bought  397  68 

Seed  bought  79  93 

Threshing,  veterinary,  etc 28  56 

Taxes 210  90 

Insurance 50  00 

Repairs  to  buildings   150  00 

Wire    fencing    40  00 

Interest  on  investment   1,080  00 


Total  expenses  $4,474  62 


122 

Receipts 

Sales  not  milk   $178  88 

Increase  in  inventory    370  00 

548  88 


Cost  of  producing  182,605  Ibs.  milk   $3,925  74 


Cost  per  hundredweight,  $2.15. 
Cost  per  quart,  .04  6/10. 
Received  for  above  milk $3,150  92 


Average  price  received  per  hundredweight,  $1.72. 
Average  price  received  per  quart,  .03  7/10. 
Net  loss  on  year's  business $774  82 

Net  loss  per  hundredweight,  .43. 
Net  loss  per  quart,  .009. 

F.  H.  LACY,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified  that  he  is 
manager  of  the  Dutchess  County  Farm  Bureau,  and  a 
graduate  of  Cornell  University: 

"  I  have  got  cost  figures  here  on  one  farm.  This  information 
has  been  kept  month  by  month  during  the  past  year  in  connection 
with  cow  testing  association  work,  but  involves  figures  which  some 
cow  testing  associations  do  not  take  into  consideration. 

"  At  the  beginning  we  took  an  inventory  of  animals  individually 
comprising  each  animal  among  the  adults  and  young  stock;  also 
equipment,  which  included  a  milk  wagon  and  Ford  auto  for  de- 
livery, and  some  cans.  I  have  this  data  tabulated.  We  have  a 
net  increase  on  account  of  live  stock  of  $87.00,  due  largely  to  the 
fact  that  the  animals  which  we  called  calves  at  the  beginning  of 
the  year  were  transferred  to  the  heifer  column  at  the  end  of  the 
year.  I  consider  that  the  owner's  inventory  was  conservative. 

"  The  cows  are  valued  individually.  I  have  worked  out  this 
cost  account  and  the  cost  per  hundredweight,  and  the  figures  are 
for  the  year  ending  December  1,  1916.  The  owner  is  Elias  Cook- 
ingham,  Staatsburgh,  1ST.  Y.  We  have  credited  the  average  in- 
crease in  value  of  cows  during  the  year. 

"  There  were  on  hand  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  26  cows. 
One  died,  three  were  sold  for  $80.00.  Three  cows  were  purchased 
for  $310.00.  At  the  end  of  the  year  there  were  25  cows  on  hand. 
Hay  is  figured  at  $12.00  per  ton;  silage  at  $5.00  per  ton,  and 
labor  at  25  cents  per  hour.  An  actual  account  was  taken  of  the 
time  used  in  caring  for  the  cows.  The  herd  production  averaged 
over  5,000  pounds." 


123 

EXHIBIT  212 
SUMMARY  OF  COSTS,  YEAR  ENDING  DECEMBER  1,  1916 

Feed   and   cows $1,837 

Feed   (other  cattle) 156 

Bedding 56 

Labor    (cows)     801 

Labor    (other  cattle) 25 

Buildings : 

Insurance 4 

Repairs 50 

Interest  on  $875  (cow  stable  only)  at  five  per  cent 44 

Equipment : 

Depreciation  on  wagon 2 

Depreciation   on   Ford 50 

Upkeep,  gas,  oil  and  tires 133 

Depreciation  on  cans 8 

Interest  on  investment  ($310)    15 

Interest  on  investment  in  stock  ($1,425  at  five  per  cent) 71 

Ice 18 

Milk    testing    25 

Feed  grinding    12 

Fly  killer    3 

White-washing  material    5 

Total.  .  $3,315 


Milk  sold    ( 1,251  cwt.=58,860  quarts) $2,531 

Milk  used  at  home  (975  quarts) 42 


Total  milk   (59,839  quarts) $2,573 

Cattle  increase $87 

Manure  at  $10  per  cattle  unit 280 

Bull   service    5 

372 


Total  returns  from  herd $2,945 

Total  herd  costs $3,315 

Total  herd  returns • 2,945 


Net   loss $370 

Cost  of  Milk 

Total    herd    cost $3,315 

Herd  returns  other  than  milk 372 

Net  cost  of  milk   ( 1,271  cwt.) $2,943 

Cost  of  milk  per  cwt $2  34 

NOTE. —  Production  per  cow,  5,085  Ibs. 


124 

W.  H.  HOOK,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified  that 
lie  is  Farm  Bureau  agent  of  Ulster  county,  with  head- 
quarters at  Kingston,  N".  Y. : 

"  A  farm  survey  was  made  in  the  Wallkill  Valley  in  the 
year  1914,  of  54  farms;  18  of  them  applied  particularly  to  dairy 
farms.  The  18  records  used  includes  all  of  those  farms  selling 
milk,  which  had  six  or  more  cows,  and  less  than  five  acres  of  fruit, 
of  varying  ages.  The  purpose  was  to  distinguish  fruit  farms  from 
dairy  farms.  Of  the  total  income,  70  per  cent  was  from  the 
dairy  and  15  per  cent  from  the  crop  sales.  Fruit  sales  amounted 
to  only  $34.00  per  farm.  Farm  profit  is  best  measured  in  terms 
of  labor  income.  Labor  income  is  what  the  farmer  has  for  his 
year's  work,  in  addition  to  a  house  and  the  usual  farm  products 
that  he  uses.  All  farm  expenses,  except  the  value  of  the  oper- 
ator's own  labor  and  interest  at  5  per  cent  on  the  capital  invested, 
are  deducted.  The  labor  income  of  these  18  farms  are  given  below : 

"  One-third  of  them  was  less  than  nothing;  one-third  from  $1.00 
to  $500,  and  one-third  over  $500.  The  average  of  the  18  is  $321. 

"  A  good  farm  hand  can  get  from  $30  to  $40  or  more  per 
month,  besides  a  home  and  farm  products.  If  $30  is  considered  a 
reasonable  wage,  then  half  of  these  farms  are  unprofitable.  At 
$40  per  month,  two-thirds  of  the  farms  are  unprofitable;  that  is, 
they  do  not  pay  the  operators  their  wage  above  expenses  and  in- 
terest. On  the  average,  these  18  fanners  receive  $26.75  per  .month 
for  their  work.  If  these -men  work  10  hours  per  day  for  300  days, 
and  5  hours  per  day  for  the  other  65  days  in  the  year,  they  receive 
9.7  cents  per  hour  for  their  work.  These  wages  are  for  managing 
a  business  with  over  $10,000  capital,  and  yet  a  business  where 
over  half  of  the  operators  do  not  make  ordinary  wages." 

JOHN  MCNAMARA,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  live  in  Herkimer  county,  near  Eichfield  Springs,  and  have 
been  in  the  dairy  business  21  years.  I  have  38  cows  and  have  64 
or  65  head  of  cattle.  They  average  about  5,000  pounds  production 
per  year.  I  aimed  to  make  winter  milk  until  this  year.  I  sold  it 
to  Borden's  at  Eichfield  Springs  on  butter  fat  tests,  but  I  have 
stopped  making  winter  milk.  I  cannot  get  enough  returns  from 


125 

the  milk  to  pay  for  the  food  and  labor.  I  tried  it  three  years,  and 
now  I  have  gone  out  of  the  winter  milk  business;  will  buy  less 
grain,  and  eliminate  a  large  part  of  the  labor.  Quite  a  few  of  my 
neighbors  are  looking  at  it  in  the  same  way.  More  farmers  will 
quit  dairying  than  will  quit  winter  milk.  I  am  not  going  to  sell 
the  cows  now,  but  I  must  stop  buying  Western  grain.  As  the 
result  I  won't  have  enough  cows  to  take  up  all  my  summer  pasture, 
but  about  four  weeks  ago  I  got  a  small  flock  of  sheep. 

"  Twenty  years  ago  J  gave  $12.50  per  acre  for  300  acres  of  as 
good  a  land  as  there  is  in  this  country.  The  buildings  cost  more 
than  I  paid  for  the  farm.  Thirteen  years  ago  I  gave  $1,855  for 
another  farm,  and  now  I  just  nicely  make  my  living  by  working 
pretty  hard.  My  labor  pays  for  my  board  and  clothes. 

"  I  made  more  money  when  I  got  7  and  8  cents  a  pound  for 
cheese,  than  I  do  to-day  at  15,  16  and  17.  The  cattle  freshened  in 
the  spring  and  then  went  to  pasture.  They  were  fed  very  little 
grain.  When  it  came  fall  we  dried  them  off  and  we  wrere  not  buy- 
ing feed  to  this  great  extent  or  keeping  extra  help  in  the  winter. 
With  winter  milk  you  have  got  to  keep  the  same  routine  of  business. 
My  dairy  always  showed  a  profit  until  I  commenced  to  make  win- 
ter milk,  four  or  five  years  ago.  Then  I  kept  going  in  deeper 
and  deeper,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that  that  part  of  it  should 
be  cut  out.  The  increased  cost  of  labor  was  not  so  much.  I  can't 
just  exactly  explain  it,  but  I  know  I  have  not  made  good  since  I 
went  into  it  three  years  ago.  It  takes  until  August  to  pay  the  feed 
bills  every  year  that  I  have  incurred  on  winter  dairying.  Prior  to 
that  I  had  a  little  money  all  the  while,  and  since  then  I  have  been 
a  little  in  debt  all  the  while.  I  have  always  had  good  dairies." 

WILLIAM  A.  BENTON,  called  before  the  Committee  testified : 

"  I  live  at  Wassaic,  town  of  Amenia,  about  25  miles  from 
Poughkeepsie.  I  have  a  farm  of  387  acres.  I  have  a  herd  of  35 
grade  Holstein  dairy  cows.  I  sell  my  milk  to  Borden's  in  Wassaic. 
I  have  some  cost  figures  for  this  farm  covering  1915.  Every- 
thing that  is  on  this  farm  goes  into  the  dairy  business.  I  estimate 
the  value  of  the  farm  at  $10,000.  These  are  my  cost  figures  as  I 
make  them  for  the  year  1915  : 


126 

Interest  on  $10,000  at  five  per  cent $500  00 

Interest  on  personal  property  and  equipment,  $6,760,  five  per  cent .'  338  00 

Taxes 106  28 

Depreciation  on  buildings  and   fences   per   year 200  00 

Depreciation  on  personal  property  other  than  dairy 411  60 

Wages  paid  in  cash 1,452  00 

Feed  purchased    1^090  92 

Fertilizer  purchased   * 48  00 

Seeds  purchased    137  22 

Lime   for   whitewash 1  00 

Veterinary 15  50 

Gasoline  for  engine  and  truck 40  00 

Seed  corn    15  00 


Total '. $4,417,52 


In  1915,  I  had  28.33  dairy  cow  units.    I  figure  the  cost  to  me 
per  cow  that  year  as  follows : 

Interest  charge    $29  58 

Taxes 5  94 

Depreciation  of  building  and  fences 7  60 

Depreciation   on   farm   tools,   horses    and   personal   property    other 

than  dairy    14  52 

Wages   paid   in   cash 51  25 

Feed  purchased    38  51 

Fertilizer   purchased  1  70 

Seed  purchased    4  88 

Lime   for   whitewash 

Veterinary,  etc 55 

Gasoline 1  41 

Seed  corn    53 


Total.  . $156  51 


Receipts  Dairy              Per  cow 

Milk  sold,  223,625  pounds $3,690  26           $130  26 

Calves  sold   :  . .  99  16 

Manure  value    552  44 

Milk  used  in  family,  3,174  pounds 52  68 

Grains   fed   hens 15  00                     55 


Total $4,409  26 

There  is  nothing  in  that  account  for  my  labor  at  all.  I  work  on 
the  farm,  but  I  haven't  received  my  pay  as  yet.  The  item  for 
labor  is  the  actual  labor,  which  I  had  to  hire.  I  took  the  value 
of  manure  from  the  Cornell  University  figures,  but  half  of  that  is 
loss  without  great  expense.  Of  course,  I  had  my  home  on  the  dairy 
farm.  I  do  not  think  I  can  give  any  idea  of  the  cash  value  of 
that. 

Assemblyman  Witter. —  My  argument  is  that  where  a  man  works 
all  of  the  year  and  don't  receive  anything  for  his  labor,  he  ought 
to  be  entitled  to  a  home. 


127 

Mr.  Benton. —  I  don't  raise  sheep.  I  have  some  poor  land  that 
would  be  well  suited  to  sheep,  but  vari6us  reasons  seem  to  be 
against  it.  Dogs  that  run  in  is  one  thing.  We  have  no  knowledge 
of  the  sheep  business  for  another.  We  have  to  find  that  out.  This 
farm  was  not  doing  any  worse  in  1915  than  it  did  in  1914.  We 
sold  183,214  pounds  of  milk  in  1914  and  that  milk  brought 
$3,044.09.  They  were  doing  better  in  the  year  1915  than  they 
did  in  1914.  The  price  per  hundred  for  1914  was  $1.66  and  the 
receipts  per  cow  were  $117.85." 

F.  T.  MILLER  of  Hinsdale,  N.  Y.,  made  the  following  state- 
ment : 

"  I  have  a  herd  of  14  dairy  cows  and  have  computed  the  cost  per 
cow  for  the  year  1915  and  the  income.  The  average  production 

was  4,471.3  pounds. 

Receipts 

Milk  sold    $63  73 

Value  of   manure 5  50 

Calf 1  50 

Milk  into  veals 315 

Butter.  .                                      2  17 


Total  credit    $76  05 


Expenses 

Food;  hay,  two  tons  at  $17 $34  00 

Corn  fodder,  two  tons  at  $4 8  00 

Oat  straw,  500  pounds .  1  00 

Millet  hay,  200  pounds 80 

Turnips,  twenty  bushels  at  fifteen  cents 3  00 

Rape 40 

Grain 7  00 

Pasture.  .                      9  00 


$63  20 
Other  Costs 

Horse  labor,  23  hours  at  fifteen  cents $3  45 

Man  labor,  146  hours  at  twenty  cents '   29  20 

Insurance,  cow  and  barn 

Depreciation  on  cow 

Taxes  on  cow  and  barn  

Interest  on   cow 

Bedding 1  25 

Bull  service    4  25 

Light,  medicine,  vetinary 

Heating  water   25 

Total   cost    $109  95 

Total  credit    76  05 

Loss $33  90 


128 

GEORGE  MILLER  of  Slate  Hill,  Orange  county,  called  before 
the  Committee,  testified : 

"  That  he  has  a  farm  of  100  acres,  with  18  dairy  cows  and  some 
young  stock,  some  pure-breds  and  some  grade  stock.  I  have  tried 
to  keep  an  account  of  the  cost  of  production  from  July  1st,  1915, 
to  July  1st,  191G.  The  herd  produced  64,500  quarts  of  milk,  de- 
livered to  the  creamery,  and  730  quarts  for  household  use.  I  make 
the  following  farm  account : 

Receipts 

Milk  sold  creamery    $2,350  42 

Milk,  household  use    26  18 

Hay  sold    125  00 

Calves  sold   .                                                        90  50 


Total  receipts    $2,592  10 


"  I  include  the  feed  of  young  stock  with  that  of  the  dairy,  be- 
cause I  make  no  charge  for  depreciation  in  dairy  cows  or  exchange 
as  the  growing  heifers  take  the  place  of  discarded  cows.  I  include 
horse  feed  because  no  charge  is  made  for  hauling  milk,  feed, 
manure,  hay,  etc.  Also  bull  feed  included,  because  no  charge  is 
made  for  service. 

Expenses 

Feed $1,267  03 

Rent  of  farm    450  00 

Filling  silo,  actual  cost   64  50 

Horseshoeing,  wagon  and  harness  repairs 75  00 

vSeed  corn  for  ensilage 5  50 

Stock  insurance    9  08 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  $1,500  worth  of  farm  tools 90  00 

Filling  ice  house   15  00 

Interest  on  18  cows  at  $100  each   108  00 


Total  expense  $2,084  11 

"  This  leaves  $509.99  for  the  year's  labor  for  myself,  my  wife 
and  two  boys.  I  thought  the  easiest  way  to  get  at  the  cost  of  the 
farm  and  buildings  was  to  charge  a  rent  rather  than  to  charge 
interest  and  insurance  for  up-keep  of  the  buildings.  That  is  a  low 
rent  figure  for  that  farm.  One  of  my  sons  is  seventeen  and  the 
other  eighteen.  I  do  not  buy  any  hay  or  silage." 

NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. —  Mr.  Miller's  figures  will  not  produce  accurate  results, 
as  he  should  not  charge  rent  for  the  whole  farm  and  then  charge  again  for 
the  hay  and  roughage.  • 


I 

OJ 

•s 

I 

'be 


129 

II.  J.  BROWN  of  Smithville  Flats,  Columbia  county,  made 
the  following  statement: 

"  I  have  only  kept  books  in  a  crude  way  since  May  1st,  1915, 
so  I  cannot  give  as  clear  a  statement  as  I  would  like  to  be  able  to 
furnish.  I  am  running  a  farm  of  74%  acres.  I  milked  seven 
cows  for  the  season  and  one  was  farrow.  I  herewith  enclose  state- 
ments of  what  I  received  from  the  dairy.  Note  the  difference  of 
butter  fat  test  from  Sept.  30,  1915,  3.9  per  cent.,  and  Oct.  6, 
3.2  per  cent.  You  will  also  note  several  jumps  from  two  to 
five  points.  I  began  taking  my  milk  May  5th,  1915. 

June  15,  1915.  Check  $50  20  Pounds  milk,  5,171     22  Ibs.  cream,  40  per  cent. 

July   15,  1915.  Check  57  32  Pounds  milk,  6,281 

Aug.   15,  1915.  Check  47  65  Pounds  milk,  5,117 

Sept,  15,  1915.  Check  35  53  Pounds  milk,  3,740 

Oct.     15,  1915.  Check  28  76  Pounds  milk,  2,701 

Nov.    15,  1915.  Check  45  17  Pounds  milk,  4,210 

Dec.    15,  1915.  Check  35  52  Pounds  milk,  2,811 

Jan.    15,  1916.  Check  24  63  Pounds  milk,  1,734 

Feb.    15,  1916.  Check  18  76  Pounds  milk,  1,402 


Total  milk  checks. $343  52  33,167  total  pounds. 


the  large  amount  I  received  from  33,167  pounds  of  milk 
and  22  pounds  of  40  per  cent  cream,  $343.54,  just  a  fraction  over 
a  $1  per  hundred  average. 

Returns  from  cows  at  factory  $343  54 

One  veal  calf   13  72 

100  Ibs.  butter,  for  our  own  use,  at  30c 30  00 


$387  26 
5  dairy  skins,  at  75c   3  75 


Total $391  01 


"  Some  of  the  expenses  to  come  out  of  the  returns  from  dairy: 

To  hay  I  had  to  buy  $37  00 

1   ton  phosphate    25  00 

1  second-hand  harness 4  25 

1,000  ft.  hemlock  lumber  at  mill 15  00 

horseshoeing  bill 2675 

hired  man  for  six  months,  at  $30 180  00 

<  oal  bill  (no  wood  on  place,  have  to  use  coal) 54  00 

•d  bill  for  team   182  00 

TVed  bill  for  team   72  00 

1   insurance   6  20 

prass  seed,  oats  and  corn 45  75 

new   roller 25  50 

5 


130 

roof  on  shed  12  00 

40  rods  fence,  at  30c 12  00 

120  posts,  at  8c '. 9  60 


$707  05 

Total  receipts  from  place  $391  01 

Earned  with  team  off  place  200  56 


$591  57 

u  Leaving  $115.48  short  of  expenses  and  I  have  not  figured  in 
any  of  our  living,  nothing  for  my  wife's  work  and  my  own  labor, 
nothing  for  interest  on  money  invested  in  farm  tools  and  stock, 
nothing  for  depreciation  of  tools  and  buildings.  Also  nothing  for 
the  hay  cut  on  f  arm,  also  one  other  little  item  of  taxes,  which  were 
$48.71,  and  no  allowance  for  pasture. 

"  When  a  man  keeps  strict  account  of  his  farming  business,  it 
is  no  wonder  they  move  from  the  farm  to  the  cities." 

ADIHSON  CRAWFORD,,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  live  at  Searsville,  about  12  miles  from  Middletown,  Orange 
county;  have  a  farm  of  165  acres.  I  have  15  milk  cows,  grade 
Holsteins,  partly.  I  have  kept  an  account  of  the  cost  of  produc- 
tion for  September  and  October,  1916.  It  is  as  follows: 

September 

Pasture  for  15  cows,  at  $2  each 

Grain  feed  for  15  cows,  at  $28  a  ton 

Hired  man,  at  $30  a  month 

Hired  girl,  at  $12  a  month 

Interest  on  15  cows,  at  $80  apiece,  one  month 

Cartage,  90  cans  at  lOc.  a  can 9  00 

Total   expense    $115  00 

Receipts 

3,450  quarts  of  milk,  at  3^c  a  quart $120  78 

Extra  allowance  for  butter-fat 


Balance $8  89 

Interest  on  farm,  valued  at  $10,000,  at  5  per  cent 

Net  loss   34  °° 

NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. —  Mr.  Crawford  cannot  justly  charge  to  the  dairy  $42 
per  month  for  rent  of  farm,  as  he  has  already  charged  the  cows  $30  for  pasture, 
which  was  a  return  from  the  farm.  It  would  seem  that  the  utmost  this  item 
could  be  was  $12  for  the  month,  which  would  leave  his  net  loss,  assuming  his 
other  figures  to  be  correct,  of  $3.11,  together  with  his  own  labor. 


131 

My  account  for  October  is  as  follows: 

Expense 

Pasture  for  15  cows,  at  $2 $30  OO 

Feed  for  15  cows,  1V2  tons,  at  $32 -  48  00 

Hired  man,  one  month    30  00 

Hired  girl,  one  month   12  00- 

Interest  on  cows,  one  month 6  00 

Cartage,  81  cans,  at  lOc  a  can 8  10 


Total  expense  $134  10 

Receipts  Under  Dairymen's  League  Contract 

3,647  pounds  of  milk  at  $2.38  per  cwt $86  80 

3,391  pounds  of  milk  at  $2.44  per  cwt 82  74 


Total   receipts    $169  54 

Less   expense 134  1O 


Balance $35  44 


Interest  on  farm,  one  month $42  00 

Net   loss    .  6  56 


XOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. —  Assuming  Mr.  Crawford's  figures  to  be  otherwise^ 
correct,  charging  the  dairy  with  $12,  the  excess  of  interest  cost  over  the  pas- 
turage charge,  there  should  be  deducted  from  the  $35.41  the  $12,  which  will 
leave  a  net  profit  for  the  month  of  $23.44.  The  statement  is  somewhat  inter- 
esting as  computed  for  the  reason  that  a  net  loss  in  September  of  $3.11  by  the 
Dariymen's  League  movement  was  changed  into  a  labor  income  of  $23.44  by 
Mr.  Crawford's  statement.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind  in  considering  this. 
statement  that  the  prices  paid  Mr.  Crawford  for  his  milk  in  the  month  of 
October,  1916,  were  entirely  different  and  far  in  advance  than  the  prevailing 
prices  paid  for  milk  for  several  years  past  in  this  State. 

The  Committee  desires  to  make  it  clear  that  the  schedules,  ex- 
hibits and  extracts  from  testimony  here  presented  are  only  a  small 
per  cent  of  the  evidence  actually  received  before  it.  It  is  the  object 
of  the  Committee  in  mating  this  report  to  include  therein  and 
report  to  the  Legislature  at  this  time  only  such  of  the  voluminous- 
record  as  will  give  a,  fair  view  of  the  nature  and  extent  of  the  evi- 
dence received  by  the  Committee  throughout  the  counties  of  the 
State  during  the  period  from  July  1st  to  November  20th,  1915. 
Nor  is  the  evidence  exhausted  upon  this  point.  It  yet  remains  to 
be  established  what  is  the  actual  economic  cost  of  keeping  a  dairy 
cow  for  a  year  in  the  State  of  New  York,  per  1,000  pounds  of  milk 
produced.  Conditions  under  which  production  is  had  are  so  vary- 
ing, so  affected  by  the  season  of  the  year,  local  market  values  of 
hay  and  roughage,  building  values  and  assumed  land  values,  that 
it  requires  the  most  careful  and  extensive  study  to  reach  reliable 
and  accurate  conclusions  of  the  average  cost  throughout  the  States 
upon  this  point. 


132 


We  summarize  some  of  those  contained  in  this  record  as  follows : 


FOOD  COST  AND  PRODUCTION 

Pood  cost 
per  cow 

Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 
sions, Class  1 .  .$49  40 


Production 
per  cow 

5,293  pounds 
6 , 590  pounds 
8,000  pounds 
4 , 444  pounds 


Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 

I*  sions,  Class  2 51  54 

Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 
sions, Class  3 68  00 

Delaware   County   Survey,    5,308   cows, 

1912,  food  and  bedding 82  50 

Delaware   County   Survey,    5;030   cows, 

1913,  food  and  bedding 76  13  4,695  pounds 

Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n.       43  00  4,000  pounds  or  less 

Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       5200    4,000-5,000  pounds 
Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       5600    5,000-6,000  pounds 
Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       5800    6 , 000-7 , 000  pounds 
Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       6200    7,000-8,000  pounds 
Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       6900    8,000-9,000  pounds 
Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Ass'n       7100  9 , 000  pounds  and  over 

New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  at 

St.  Lawrence  University 73  20  7, 160  pounds 

Dr.  Carl  W.  Larson's  type  cow 75  29  8,500  pounds 

Dr.  Larson's  second  class 44  39  3,000  pounds 

Chemung  County  Survey,  237  hill  farms, 

Class  1 45  00    Receipts  per  cow  $50  and  less 

Chemung  County  Survey,  237  hill  farms, 

Class  2 51  00    Receipts  per  cow  $51  to  $75 

Chemung  County  Survey,  237  hill  farms, 

Class  3 60  00    Receipts  per  cow  $76  to  $100 

Chemung  County  Survey,  237  hill  farms, 

Class  4 66  00    Receipts  per  cow  over  $100 

Chemung    County    Survey,    115    valley 

farms,  Class  1 49  00    Receipts  per  cow  $50  and  less 

Chemung    County    Survey,    115    valley 

farms,  Class  2 55  00    Receipts  per  cow  $51  to  $75 

Chemung    County    Survey,    115    valley 

farms,  Class  3 68  00    Receipts  per  cow  $76  to  $100 

Chemung    County    Survey,    115    valley 

farms,  Class  4 71  00    Receipts  per  cow  $101  to  $125 

Chemung    County    Survey,    115    valley 

farms,  Class  5 76  00    Receipts  per  cow  over  $125 

Averages  for  hill  and  valley  regions,  237 

hill  farms 47  00    Receipts  per  cow  $62 

Averages  for  hill  and  valley  regions,  115 

vaBey  farms 61  00    Receipts  per  cow  $88 

George  M.  Welles  &  Son 84  18  9,000  pounds 

Herd  No.  1,  Tioga  county 61  33  6,400  pounds 

Herd  No.  2,  Tioga  county 130  00    Production  unknown 

Herd  No.  3,  Tioga  county 70  00  8, 500  pounds 

Herd  No.  4,  Tioga  county 94  40  6,500  pounds 

Herd  No.  7,  Tioga  county 94  80    Production  unknown 

Herd  No.  8,  Tioga  county 68  50    Production  unknown 

Thomas  Gahagan,  Broome  county 55  67    Returns  per  cow  $75 

George  A.  Adams,  North  Norwich 83  20  8,666  pounds 

Ten  herds  in  New  Berlin  Cow  Testing 

Association:. 

Herd  No.  1 56  93  5 , 547  pounds 

Herd  No.  2.. .  44  48  6,500  pounds 


133 


Food  cost  Production 

per  cow  per  cow 

Herd  No.  3 $33  59  2 , 250  pounds 

Herd  No.  4 52  91  6,413  pounds 

Herd  No.  5 42  60  6,600  pounds 

Herd  No.  6 38  25  6,000  pounds 

Herd  No.  7 32  60  4,800  pounds 

Herd  No.  8 34  25  5,400  pounds 

Herd  No.  9 40  08  4,900  pounds 

Herd  No.  10 54  26  6,454  pounds 

Average  10  herds,  New  Berlin 41  33  5,463  pounds 

Mr.  Smith's  computation  from  cost  ac- 
counts, Chenango  county,  Class  1 38  00  4,000  pounds 

Mr.  Smith's  computation  from  cost  ac- 
counts, Chenango  county,  Class  2 49  00  6,000  pounds 

Mr.  Smith's  computation  from  cost  ac- 
counts, Chenango  county,  Class  3 60  00  8,000  pounds 

C.  H.  Boos,  Sherburne,  N.  Y 90  00  9,000  pounds 

Bernard  Aker,  East  Cobleskill 77  81     Production  not  given 

H.  B.  Livermore,  Sangerfield 117  61  10, 500  pounds 

F.    O.    Ross'    computation,   2,363    cows, 

Oneida  county 53  86  5, 133  pounds 

J.  R.  Teall's  Cayuga  County  Survey,  50 

farms 69  45  5,619  pounds 

New  York  State  Experiment  Farm  at 

Geneva,  20  cow  average 63  39  6,919  pounds 

Markham  &  Puffer  Certified  Milk  Farm, 

Monroe  county 110  00  5,800  pounds 

F.  S.  Markham,  Port  Leyden,  N.  Y 95  00  8,122  pounds 

26  dairies  in  Montgomery  county  ..  .....  66  00  5,896  pounds 

Average  four  cow  testing  associations  in 

Wyoming  county 52  06  5,503  pounds 


PASTURES 

It  must  be  remembered  that  in  computing  these  feed  costs  many 
fail  to  include  pasture  at  all  and  the  pasture  and  other  factors  were 
figured  at  widely  varying  sums.  In  this  connection,  Dr.  Larson 
in  his  recent  study  says: 

"  Of  all  the  items  of  cost,  the  pasture  is  most  important,  though 
it  is  little  mentioned  in  most  previous  writings  on  cost  records.  Its 
importance  is  pointed  out  by  Cooper  (Minneapolis  Agricultural 
Experiment  Station,  Bulletin  No.  124),  who  says:  'Importance 
of  pasture  in  the  economy  of  the  farm  is  illustrated  by  the  small 
quantity  of  grain  or  roughage  fed  during  the  pastural  season. 
*  *  *  For  practically  five  months  out  of  each  year,  the  cattle 
were  supported  almost  entirely  upon  the  grass  crop.' 

"  Professor  Warren  says :  '  Pastures  furnish  our  cheapest  feed. 
The  pasture  of  one  cow  one  day  costs  3  to  6  cents.  Hay  or  hay  and 
silage,  12  to  15  cents,  grain  12  to  15  cents.  A  good  pasture  will 


134 

replace  all  of  the  hay  and  much  of  the  grain.  Pasture  produces 
more  milk  than  other  feed  at  one-fifth  to  one-tenth  of  the  cost? 
The  amount  charged  for  pasture  varies  with  different  investiga- 
tors, as,  for  example,  Hooper  and  Eobertson  (Jefferson  County 
Survey)  suggest  $1  to  $1.50  per  month.  Rassmussen  (New  Hamp- 
shire), 25  cents  to  $1  per  month.  Lindsey  (Massachusetts),  5 
cents  per  day.  Thompson  (Delaware  County  Survey),  $4.29  per 
cow.  Woll  (Wisconsin),  $5  per  season. 

'*  At  these  prices  the  cost  while  on  pasture  is  very  much  cheaper 
than  if  the  cows  were  fed  in  any  other  way.  It  shows,  however, 
how  important  a  factor  the  pasture  is  in  calculating  feed  costs 
and  the  importance  in  indicating  in  cost  records  the  part  of  the 
feed  secured  from  pasture.  Calculations  show  that  when  corn  is 
worth  one  cent  per  pound,  a  dairyman  can  afford  to  pay  10  cents 
per  day,  or  $3  per  month  for  good  pasture  rather  than  feed  his 
cows  in  the  barn  on  feed  of  equal  cost. 

;<  It  should  be  said,  however,  that  a  high-producing  cow  cannot 
get  enough  food  from  pasture  to  keep  up  her  flow  and  maintain 
her  weight.  When  pasture  is  charged  at  a  definite  price  per  month 
or  season,  the  economy  of  production  favors  the  smaller  producer. 
Cows  giving  large  amounts  of  milk  need  some  concentrated  feed 
in  addition  to  pasture.  To  estimate  the  general  expense,  which 
includes  taxes,  making,  repairing  fences,  seeding  or  re-seeding  and 
fertilizing,  pasturage  would  be  computed  as  follows: 

"  1.  Value  per  acre  multiplied  by  5  per  cent  which  may  be  con- 
sidered as  rent. 

"  2.  General  expense,  which,  on  the  average,  will  be  about  $1 
per  acre. 

""  3.  Acres  required  per  cow  per  season,  or  estimated  on  the 
hasis  of  cost  per  cow,  per  month.  The  formula  for  pasture  cost 
where  land  is  worth  $50  per  acre  and  would  pasture  one  cow  on 
two  acres  for  five  months,  would  be  as  follows :  Rent,  $2.50 ;  gen- 
eral expense,  $1.00 ;  cost  per  acre,  $3.50 ;  two  acres  per  cow,  $7.00. 

"  Under  certain  conditions,  pasture  will  be  worth  several  times 
five  dollars  per  annum,  per  cow." 

The  foregoing  evidence  indicates  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  an 
exact  average  cost  of  food  and  bedding  for  the  average  dairy  cow 


135 

in  the  State  of  New  York,  or  elsewhere.  It  is  obvious  that  this  cost 
will  be  entirely  different  both  for  labor  and  food  where  little  grain 
is  used  and  production  is  had  only  from  early  spring  until  late 
fall  than  where  a  fairly  uniform  supply  of  milk  is  produced  for 
market  milk.  In  the  former  case,  the  product  goes  largely  into 
butter  and  cheese.  In  the  latter  case,  because  of  the  location  of 
the  producer,  the  product  is  required  for  market  milk  as  a  daily 
necessity  to  our  large  communities,  and  the  territory  available  for 
that  purpose  is  reasonably  limited.  The  market  milk  product, 
therefore,  costs  much  more  to  produce  and  has  a  continued  excess 
charge  for  labor  and  for  each  other  item  that  enters  into  the  cost 
of  production. 

THE  VALUE  OF  MARKET  MILK  NOT  CONTROLLED  BY  BUTTER  AND 

CHEESE  PRICES 

The  foregoing  observations  and  cost  figures  make  it  obvious  that 
the  value  of  market  milk  is  not  dependent  upon  the  current  market 
price  of  butter  and  cheese.  This  discovery  is  not  original  with 
this  report,  yet  the  evidence  produced  before  us  leads  to  the  con- 
clusion that  a  great  many  buyers  of  market  milk  in  fixing  prices 
to  be  paid  therefor,  have  held  forth  the  argument  with  more  or  less 
effect  upon  the  producers  that  the  price  to  be  paid  for  market  milk 
should  be  determined  by  the  current  butter  and  cheese  market.  In 
fact,  some  cases  have  come  to  the  attention  of  the  Committee  where 
the  shipping  station  price  was  adjusted  according  to  the  prices 
received  by  neighboring  cheese  factories,  especially  during  the 
summer  season.  However  this  may  be,  a  chart  prepared  by  Pro- 
fessor W.  W.  Fisk  of  Cornell  University,  for  the  use  of  the  Com- 
mittee, shows  that  from  May  1st  until  July  1st,  1915,  the  price 
of  market  milk  ran  considerably  below  the  current  prices  for  but- 
ter and  cheese  during  those  two  months  and  very  nearly  approached 
the  price  of  butter  during  the  months  of  April  and  July.  This 
would  appear  to  have  been  an  economic  wrong  suffered  by  the  pro- 
ducers of  market  milk  in  this  territory.  This  is  especially  appar- 
ent when  we  consider  that  market  milk  had  the  added  expense  of 
health  board  inspections,  alterations  and  improved  conditions  of 
production,  which  were  in  nowise  required  for  the  production  of 
cheese  or  butter. 


136 


AVERAGE  COST  PER  COW  PER  ANNUM,  INCLUDING  FEED,  LABOR 

AND  OVERHEAD 


SUMMARY 


Total  cost 


Production 


per  cow  per  cow 
Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 
sions, Class  1 $86  94                5 , 293  pounds 

Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 
sions, Class  2 92  91  6 , 590  pounds 

Boston  Chamber  of  Commerce  conclu- 
sions, Class  3 162  00  8,000  pounds 

Delaware  County  Survey,  5,308  cows, 

1912 118  84  4,444  pounds 

Delaware  County  Survey,   5,030  cows, 

1913 107  67  4,695  pounds 

New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  at 

St.  Lawrence  University 110  70  7, 160  pounds 

Dr.  Carl  W.  Larson's  type  cow,  Class  1 ..   150  75  8 , 500  pounds 

Dr.  Larson's  Class  2 120  36  3,000  pounds 

George    M.    Welles   &    Son,    Chemung 

county 144  68  9,045  pounds 

Thomas  Gahagan,  Broome  count y  (esti- 
mating Gahagan's  labor  and  that  of 

his  family  at  $50  per  month) 92  67     Returns  per  cow  $75 

Herd  No.  1,  Tioga  County  Survey 122  29  6,400  pounds 

Herd  No.  2,  Tioga  County  Survey 178  00    Production  unknown 

Herd  No.  3,  Tioga  County  Survey 116  00  8,500  pounds 

Herd  No.  4,  Tioga  County  Suryey 166  00  6,500  pounds 

Herd  No.  7,  Tioga  County  Survey 183  50     Production  unknown 

Herd  No.  8,  Tioga  County  Survey 169  13     Production  unknown 

Average  of  152  farms  in  Broome  county.   10500  5,055  pounds 

George    A.    Adams,     North    Norwich, 

Chenango  county 139  20  8,666  pounds 

Mr.  Smith's  computation  from  cost  ac- 
counts, farm  surveys,  general : 

Class  1 75  00  4,000  pounds 

Class  2 95  00  6,000  pounds 

Class  3 115  00  8,000  pounds 

C.  H.  Boos,  Sherburne,  N.  Y 142  00  9,000  pounds 

Bernard  Aker,  East  Cobleskill,  N.  Y .  .  .   115  00     Production  unknown 

Fred  Deck,  Marcy,  Oneida  county 151  00  7,284  pounds 

H.    B.    Livermore,   Sangerfield,   Oneida 

county 199  21  10,578  pounds 

G.  W.  Clinch,    Westmoreland,    Oneida 

county Ill  00  6,387  pounds 

Markham  &  Puffer  Farm,  Avon,  Monroe 

county  (certified  milk) 337  00  6, 140  pounds 

Average  cost  of  26  dairies  in  Montgom- 
ery county 124  63  5,896  pounds 

Average  four  cow  testing  associations  in 

Wyoming  county 94  93  5, 503  pounds 


137 

SUMMARY  OF  RETURNS  PER  Cow 
Credits  for  Manure  and  Calf 

In  making  estimates  of  the  annual  cost  in  keeping  a  dairy  cow, 
it  is  usual  to  deduct  from  the  gross  cost  the  value  of  the  manure 
and  calf.  Except  in  pure  bred  herds  the  value  of  the  calf  is  usually 
insignificant.  In  former  years  they  merely  furnished  calf  hides 
for  the  tanner,  and  brought  from  75  cents  to  $1.  Of  late  years 
those  values  seem  to  increase. 

At  this  time  there  are  perhaps  several  hundred  thousand  people 
in  the  State  of  is"ew  York  who  desire  and  are  anxious  to  buy  the 
veal  calf  at  the  age  of  one  week  for  food.  Many  authorities  con- 
tend that  such  food,  the  animal  being  otherwise  healthy,  is  per- 
fectly wholesome  and  useful,  and  that  the  sale  of  such  animal 
should  be  permitted. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  spite  of  the  law,  the  traffic  in  such  ani- 
mals is  now  carried  on  in  the  neighborhood  of  our  large  cities  to 
a  considerable  degree;  the  foreign-born  population  going  into  the 
country  and  providing  themselves  with  the  young  calves  direct 
from  the  dairymen. 

Obviously,  if  the  dairymen  could  feed  the  calf  for  one  week,  and 
then  sell  it  as  food  to  those  who  desire  to  buy  it,  this  food  would 
be  produced  at  a  very  low  cost  to  the  dairymen,  as  the  milk  has  no 
value  during  that  period.  The  consumer  who  desires  it  would 
likewise  be  able  to  procure  such  calves  at  a  low  price,  and  both 
parties  would  profit.  Three  arguments  are  presented  against  the 
State  permitting  the  use  of  such  food: 

First,  that  the  food  is  unwholesome  and  unhealthy.  This  belief 
is  well  established  in  the  minds  of  the  greater  part  of  our  popula- 
tion, but  competent  authorities  who  have  studied  the  matter  assert 
that  it  has  no  foundation  in  fact,  that  the  wholesomeness  of  the 
food  depends  upon  the  particular  animal,  and  not  at  all  upon  the 
age.  The  Federal  Government  seems  to  assume  that  to  be  the 
case  in  its  present  regulation  of  interstate  traffic,  the  Federal 
regulation  now  providing  for  inspection  of  the  carcass  as  to  gen- 
eral health  condition,  and  not  at  all  as  to  its  age. 

Second,  it  is  contended  that  the  consumer  fails  in  the  very  young 
animal  to  get  an  adequate  food  value,  the  tissues  lacking  the  neces- 
sary food  elements,  and  having  a  small  comparative  food  value. 


138 

Third,  it  is  contended  that  the  sale  of  immature  veal  would  cause 
the  general  consumer  to  be  prejudiced  against  all  veal  on  the 
market,  and  result  in  reduced  consumption. 

These  various  propositions  the  Committee  makes  no  attempt  to 
solve,  but  leaves  them  to  the  further  consideration  of  the  public. 
It  has  been  suggested,  however,  that  in  the  present  era  of  the  high 
cost  of  living,  which  of  course  brings  the  greater  burden  to  the 
laboring  class,  if  there  is  a  large  element  that  desires  to  procure 
such  food,  and  are  entirely  satisfied  with  it,  and  they  are  able  to 
procure  it  at  a  low  cost;  and  competent  authorities  establish  that 
the  food  is  entirely  wholesome  and  healthful,  it  is  difficult  for  the 
State  to  justify  its  action  in  not  permitting  so  large  a  number  of 
the  population  to  avail  itself  of  this  supply.  It  is  contended  that 
there  could  only  be  one  sound  argument  for  such  action  on  the 
part  of  the  State ;  that  is,  that  if  the  State  did  so  permit  the  sale 
of  calves  for  food  at  the  age  of  one  week,  or  ten  days,  it  would 
ultimately  injure  the  dairy  industry  as  a  whole  in  the  State,  and 
ultimately  through  such  injury  cause  increasing  prices  to  all  dairy 
products. 

Credit  for  Manure 

The  credit  to  be  allowed  for  the  production  of  manure  of  the 
dairy  cow  is  conceded  to  be  substantial  by  all  parties  who  have 
studied  the  question.  It  is  of  vast  importance  to  the  State  as  a 
whole.  By  its  continued  production  the  fertility  of  the  soil  of 
the  State  is  continued.  It  is  a  capital  investment,  however,  and 
an  investment  and  production  that  brings  little  present  return  to 
the  dairymen.  Its  benefit  comes  almost  wholly  to  the  owner  of 
the  land  and  its  returns  are  largely  for  future  years.  It  by  no 
means  brings  returns  for  labor  expended  in  the  current  year,  and 
only  the  man  who  has  secured  capital  can  afford  to  invest  in  1915 
his  efforts  and  labor  which  are  to  be  repaid  to  him  in  the  future. 
To  the  tenant  farmer,  or  the  man  working  a  dairy  farm  on  shares, 
it  offers  no  encouragement  whatsoever.  The  amount  of  fertility 
that  the  State  or  the  owner  is  to  recover  in  the  future  years  through 
this  production  of  the  dairy  offers  him  little  aid.  Likewise,  it 
would  seem  necessary  for  the  continued  development  of  the  in- 
dustry in  the  State,  that  the  men  may  be  enabled  to  buy  farms  and 


139 

pay  for  them  largely,  or  in  considerable  part,  from  the  profits  of 
dairying.  While  they  will  be  aided  somewhat  in  their  efforts  by 
the  continued  fertility  of  their  farms,  yet  these  considerations  will 
be  far  short  of  affording  them  relief  in  meeting  annual  interest 
and  a  small  principal  payment. 

The  building  of  a  railroad  through  any  section  of  the  State 
means  ultimately  a  general  improvement  in  that  section,  a  develop- 
ment increase  both  of  passenger  and  freight  traffic,  and  consequent 
greater  returns  both  to  the  residents  and  to  the  railway  campany. 
Nevertheless,  the  freight  charges  are  usually  adjusted  to  bring  a 
present  return  for  the  labor  and  capital  invested.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  any  manufacturing  enterprise.  These  suggestions  are 
not  fully  applicable  because  it  may  be  said  that  the  manure  is  a 
present  marketable  commodity,  but  so  in  a  way  is  the  line  of  loca- 
tion of  the  railway  line.  Communities  will  raise  funds  and  make 
donations  to  secure  it,  and  up  until  a  few  years  ago,  towns  bonded 
themselves  for  large  amounts  to  secure  such  development.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  factory  or  manufacturing  business.  So  it 
appears  there  is  a  line  of  argument  which  may  be  followed  which 
tends  to  the  conclusion  that  in  ascertaining  what  returns  are  fairly 
necessary  to  continue  the  growth  of  the  dairy  industry  in  the 
State  of  New  York,  no  great  consideration  should  be  given  to  the 
present  value  to  be  fixed  for  the  fertility  supplied  by  the  dairy. 
It  is  considered  a  by-product  of  great  value  to  the  State  as  a  whole, 
and  to  the  generations  that  follow,  but  it  is  not  a  factor  of  great 
weight  with  the  working  fanner  and  his  family,  or  to  the  tenant 
working  the  farm  on  shares,  when  he  comes  to  consider  the  ques- 
tion as  to  whether  or  not  he  shall  continue  in  the  dairy  business 
or  abandon  farming  as  a  pursuit. 

If,  therefore,  conditions  are  to  be  such  as  to  insure  satisfactory 
conditions  of  home  life  on  the  farms,,  it  seems  to  be  necessary  that 
a  fair  return  be  produced  from  current  receipts  for  the  dairy  products 
produced.  Otherwise,  the  dairy  farmer  may  say,  "  In  1914  I  had 
20  cows.  In  estimating  my  profit  for  1914  you  chadge  me  with  $15 
received  from  each  cow,  or  $300  for  the  manure  produced.  If  that 
is  so,  as  this  dairy  had  the  entire  benefit  of  that  valuable  production 
in  1915,  you  must  charge  that  $300  as  an  expense  in  my  1915  opera- 
tions. Consequently,  you  will  see  that  to  make  any  substantial  gain 
by  this  means,  my  operations  must  be  carried  through  a  long  series 
of  years,  whereby  the  increased  fertility  of  my  farm  will  allow  me  to 


140 

produce  milk  at  a  much  lower  cost;  whereas,  the  history  of  sev- 
eral years  past  disputes  that  argument  by  showing  that  I  am  pro- 
ducing milk  at  a  constantly  increasing  cost.  I  cannot  afford  to 
supply  manure  at  the  price  charged  in  these  cost  accounts  and  sell 
the  dairy  hay  and  grain  at  present  prices.'7 

It  is  suggested  that  if  on  a  given  farm,  valued  at  $7,000,  the 
dairy  of  20  cows  is  to  be  credited  with  a  production  of  manure 
to  the  market  value  of  $300  in  any  year,  which  is  not  to  be  con- 
sidered as  belonging  to  and  a  part  of  the  farm,  but  to  be  removed 
therefrom,  that  the  value  of  that  farm  at  the  end  of  that  year 
should  be  taken  at  $6,700;  showing  a  depreciation  of  $300.  It 
is  believed  that  this  is  more  or  less  the  conviction  in  the  farming 
communities,  and  it  finds  some  support  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
common  law,  that  the  manure  on  the  farm  is  part  of  the  real 
estate,  and  goes  with  it  on  a  sale,  unless  specially  excepted. 
Obviously,  the  manure  is  so  much  fertility  removed  from  the  real 
estate  by  the  operations  of  the  current  year.  So  are  the  milk 
solids.  If  it  is  not  to  be  returned,  has  not  the  real  estate  depre- 
ciated to  that  extent  in  value  ?  This  would  apparently  be  true  aa 
to  all  production,  with  the  exception  of  that  arising  from  pur- 
chased feeds  not  grown  upon  the  farm.  Such  importations  have  an 
additional  value  but  come  at  high  cost. 

The  Committee  is  not  attempting  tlo  solve  this  economic 
question,  but  only  refers  to  these  arguments  as  tending  to 
sirow  that  the  question  is  sufficiently  complicated  as  to  have 
small  weight  with  the  average  dairyman  in  determining 
whether  or  not  he  is  getting  an  adequate  labor  and  capital 
return  from  his  business.  Of  course,  it  is  a  deep-seated 
conviction  in  the  farming  community  that  the  dairy  preserves  the 
fertility  of  the  farm  and  builds  it  up,  and  is  desirable,  and  to  be 
followed,  if  possible;  but  the  type  the  Committee  has  in  mind  in 
discussing  this  question  are  the  people  who,  finding  agricultural 
pursuits  ill-paid  and  over-worked,  contemplate  abandoning  it  as  a 
whole.  It  is  probable  that  the  decision  of  those  who  have  followed 
dairying  as  an  occupation,  will  rest  upon  the  net  return  per  cow,, 
for  products  sold,  and  a  summary  of  the  net  returns  per  cow  for 
dairy  products  sold,  from  some  of  the  evidence  in  the  record,  may 
be  of  interest. 


141 


SUMMARY  OF  RETURNS  PER  COW  FOR  DAIRY  PRODUCTS  SOLD 

Returns  Production 

per  cow  per  cow 

Average    of    5,308    cows    in    Delaware 

county  in  1912 $75  49 

Average    of    5,030    cows    in    Delaware 

county  in  1913 80  90 

Northern  Chemung  Cow  Testing  Asso- 
ciation, three  year  averages,  1911- 
1913: 

16  cows 62  00 

28  cows 90  00 

38  cows 98  00 

64  cows 114  00 

67  cows 129  00 

34  cows 152  00 

31  cows 171  00 

Averages  for  237  hill  farms,  Chemung 

county: 

110  farms 37  00 

66  farms 62  00 

45  farms 87  00 

16  farms 119  00 

Valley  farms  (6  or  more  cows) : 

15  farms 42  00 

21  farms 63  00 

27  farms 87  00 

32  farms 118  00 

New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  at 

St.  Lawrence  University,  1912 112  00 

Average  of  38  Cattaraugus  county  farms : 

13  farms 47  00 

15  farms 64  00 

10  farms 93  00 

Average  of  66  Dutchess  county  farms, 

1914 98  00 

Average  of  95  Jefferson  county  farms. .  .  61  00 

George  M.  Welles  &  Son 146  50 

152  farms  in  Broome  county 65  00 

George    A.    Adams,     North    Norwich, 

Chenango  county 132  00 

10  herds,  New  Berlin  Cow  Testing  Asso- 
ciation, average 82  51 

C.  H.  Boos,  Sherburne,  N'  Y 135  00 

Gouverneur,  St.  Lawrence  county, 
averages : 

8  farms 50  00  or  below.  Not  given 

14  farms 50  00  to  $59.      Not  given 

24  farms 60  00  to  $69.      Not  given 

33  farms 70  00  to  $79.  <  Not  given 

32  farms 80  00  to  $89.      Not  given 

20  farms 90  00  to  $99.      Not  given 

11  farms Over  $100.          Not  given 

J.  R.  Teall's  average,  Cayuga  county, 

24  farms 82  99  5,619  pounds 

Curtis  F.  Gifford,  Wilson,  Niagara 

county 136  00  6,000  pounds 

F.  S.  Markham,  Port  Leyden,  N.  Y 121  60  8,000  pounds 

Average  of  26  farms  in  Montgomery 

county 90  03  5,898  pounds 

Average  four  cow  testing  associations, 

Wyoming  county 91  21  5, 503  pounds 


4,644  pounds 
4,695  pounds 


3,457  pouads 
4 , 605  pounds 
5, 439  pounds 
6,659  pounds 
7 , 493  pounds 
8,563  pounds 
9,836  pounds 


Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 

Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 

7, 160  pounds 

Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 
Production  not  given 

Production  not  given 
4, 600  pounds 
9,045  pounds 

Production  not  given 

8, 666  pounds 

5,463  pounds 
9, 000  pounds 


142 

Returns  Production  j 

per  cow  per  cow 

Ave-ages  of  238  cows,  Carrol  Cow  Test- 
ing Association,  19i6: 

24  cows $52  67  From  4,099  to  9,009  pounds 

39  cows .     70  59  From  4,000  to  9,000  pounds 

39  cows 89  3  i  From  4,000  to  9,000  pounds 

42  co.vs 110  13  From  4,000  to  9,000  pounds 

58  cows 132  4-3  From  4,090  to  9,000  pounds 

39  cows 170  88  From  4,009  to  9,009  pounds 

6  ccws 214  33  From  4,009  to  9,000  pounds 

F.  T.  Miller,  Hinsdale,  N.  Y.,  1915 63  75  4,471  pounds 


CONCLUSION 

It  would  appear  beyond  question  that  the  cow  producing  5,000 
pounds  of  milk,  which  was  sold  at  $1.60  per  hundredweight,  bring- 
ing a  return  of  $80,  could  not  be  kept  at  a  profit  during  the  period 
from  1911  to  1915,  unless  a  very  substantial  value  is  to  be  allowed 
for  the  production  of  manure.  Even  allowing  for  the  production 
of  manure  at  a  substantial  figure,  according  to  the  evidence  pre- 
sented to  the  Committee,  the  accounts  of  those  carrying  on  the 
industry  showed  little  gain,  and  in  the  great  majority  of  instances 
considerable  loss,  assuming  that  labor  is  to  be  compensated  at  the 
prevailing  standard.  But  the  dairyman,  in  considering  the  ques- 
tion of  whether  or  not  to  continue  the  business,  looks  principally 
to  the  current  receipts  from  the  sale  of  dairy  products.  As  sug- 
gested, the  continued  fertility  of  the  soil  will  not  be  seriously  con- 
sidered upon  the  question  of  the  present  adequate  labor  and  capital 
return. 

An  examination  of  the  prices  paid  for  milk  will  disclose  that 
$1.60  per  hundredweight  was  not  secured  by  the  average  producer 
of  market  milk  during  the  years  1914  and  1915.  Both  the  indi- 
cations of  total  returns  per  cow  and  of  schedule  of  station  prices 
seem  to  establish  that  fact. 

METHODS  OF  BUYING  MILK 

Prior  to  the  month  of  October,  1916,  there  were  practically  as 
many  different  methods  of  buying  milk  from  the  dairymen  of  the 
State  as  there  were  corporations  or  individuals  in  the  business  of 
distribution,  and  except  in  a  few  instances,  almost  as  many  dif- 
ferent methods  and  scales  of  prices  as  there  were  stations.  In 


143 

many  cases  a  written  contract  was  drawn  and  submitted  to  the 
dairyman  for  his  signature  and  a  certain  number  of  signatures 
procured.  Usually  little  attention  is  paid  to  the  signing  of  the 
contracts,  either  by  the  distributor  or  producer.  The  terms  of 
the  contract  lying  in  the  milk  station  or  in  the  possession  of  some 
of  the  dairymen  become  generally  known;  the  station  receives  all 
comers  whose  milk  passes  inspection  for  the  product  required  and 
milk  checks  are  distributed  more  or  less  on  the  contract  basis  to 
all.  In  other  cases,  publication  is  made  in  the  spring  or  fall  for 
what  has  come  to  be  known  as  "  the  summer  contract  price/'  and 
the  "  winter  contract  price,"  and  all  dairymen  bringing  milk  are 
paid  those  prices.  The  prices  vary  or  are  intended  to  vary  some- 
what according  to  the  barn  score  of  the  individual  dairyman,  the 
butter-fat  content,  the  bacteria  count  in  one  or  two  instances,  the 
locality  of  the  station,  the  freight  rate  to  Xcw  York  or  other  city, 
the  business  standing  of  the  buyer  and  the  demand  for  milk  at  the 
particular  shipping  point.  The  prevailing  method  by  the  smaller 
dealers  or  milk  station  operators  is  to  post  the  price  from  month 
to  month  on  the  milk  station  door. 

MILK  PHICKS 

About  the  month  of  March,  191G,  the  Borden  Company  pub- 
lished and  distributed  through  the  buying  stations  a  slip  reading 

as  follows : 

EXHIBIT  No.  10 
SUMMER  CONTRACT  PRICES,  1916 

3.3       3.4       3.5       3.6       3.7       3.8       3.9  4.0       4.1  4.2  4.3  4.4 

April     $1.30  $1.33  $1.36  $1.39  $1.42  $1.45  $1.48  $1.51  $1.54  $1.57  $1.60  $1.63 

May.       1.05     1.08     1.11      1.14     1.17     1.20     1.23  1.26     1.29  1.32  1.35  1.38 

June.         .99     1.02     1.05     1.08     1.11     1.14     1.17  1.20     1.23  1.26  1.29  1.32 

July.       1.25     1.28     1.31     1.34     1.37     1.40     1.43  1.46     1.49  1.52  1.55  1.58 

Aug.        1.41      1.44     1.47     1.50     1.53     1.56     1.59  1.62     1.65  1.68  1.71  1.74 

Sept.       1.50     1.53     1.56     1.59     1.62     1.65     1.68  1.71     1.74  1.77  1.80  1.83 


The  above  prices  will  be  paid  to  dairymen  where  they  maintain,  during  this 
contract,  conditions  scoring  not  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equip- 
ment and  forty-three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  according  to  the  New  York 
Department  of  Health  score  card,  as  scored  by  the  company's  representatives. 
Dairymen  scoring  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equipment  and  forty- 
three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  will  receive  ten  cents  (lOc)  per  100  pounds 
less  than  the  above  schedule. 

When  the  patrons  of  the  Borden  Company,  however,  received 
-the  payments  for  April,  May  and  June,  10  cents  per  hundred  addi- 


144 

tional  was  added  to  those  prices.     About  September,  1915,  there 

was  published  and  distributed  in  the  same  way  the  following 
document: 

EXHIBIT  NO.  10 

WINTER  CONTRACT  PRICES,  1915-1916 

3.0       3.1       3.2       3.3       3.4       3.5       3.6       3.7       3.8  3.9  4.0       4.1 

Oct.       $1.60  $1.63  $1.66  $1.69  $1.72  $1.75  $1.78  $1.81  $1.84  $1.87  $1.90  $1.93 

Nov.        1.70     1.73     1.76     1.79     1.82     1.85     1.88     1.91     1.94  1.97  2.00     2.03 

Dec.        1.70     1.73     1.76     1.79     1.82     1.85     1.88     1.91     1.94  1.97  2.00     2.03 

Jan.        1.60     1.63     1.66     1.69     1.72     1.75     1.78     1.81     1.84  1.87  1.90     1.93 

Feb.        1.55     1.58     1.61     1.64     1.67     1.70     1.73     1.76     1.79  1.82  1.85     1.88 

Mar.       1.50     1.53     1.56     1.59     1.62     1.65     1.68     1.71     1.74  1.77  1.80     1.83 


The  above  prices  will  be  paid  to  dairymen  where  they  maintain,  during  this 
contract,  conditions  scoring  not  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equip- 
ment and  forty-three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  according  to  the  New  York 
Department  of  Health  score  card,  as  scored  by  the  company's  representatives. 
Dairymen  scoring  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equipment  and  forty- 
three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  will  receive  ten  cents  (lOc)  per  100  pounds 
less  than  the  above  schedule. 

These  prices,  with  the  additions,  prevail,  as  far  as  this  Com- 
mittee is  able  to  learn,  for  all  milk  delivered  at  Borden  stations, 
with  a  variation  in  the  different  freight  zones,  this  being  the  long 

haul  contract. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  11 
BORDEN'S  MILK  CONTRACT 

THIS  AGREEMENT,  made  this  15th  day  of  March,  1916,  between  BORDEX'S 
CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY,  party  of  the  first  part,  hereinafter  known  as  the 
Company,  and  each  of  the  undersigned,  parties  of  the  second  part,  hereinafter 
known  as  the  Dairyman. 

WITNESSETH,  that  the  parties  hereto  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of 
one  dollar,  each  to  the  other  in  hand  paid,  receipt  of  whicli  is>  hereby 
acknowledged,  each  agree  individually  and  not  for  others  to  perform  the 
agreement  herein  set  forth  and  specified. 

THE  DAIRYMAN  AGREES  to  sell  and  deliver  daily  to  the  company,  at  its  plant 
at  Cortland,  N.  Y.,  at  the  hour  it  names,  the  amount  of  milk  produced 
by  his  or  her  dairy  as  specified  below,  the  milking  of  the  morning  of  delivery 
and  evening  preceding,  such  milk  to  be  whole,  sweet,  unadulterated,  uncon- 
taminated  and  of  standard  richness. 

That  the  cow  stables  will  be  amply  lighted  with  windows  and  well  ventil- 
ated; to  keep  them  clean,  removing  daily  therefrom  all  manure  or  foul 
material;  to  use  no  horse  manure  or  foul  material  for  bedding;  to  keep  no 
hogs,  sheep  or  fowls  housed  in  the  said  stables;  to  keep  the  cows  clean; 

To  thoroughly  wash  and  scald  all  milk  utensils  used  at  the  dairy  immedi- 
ately after  use  morning  and  evening;  to  put  no  milk  in  unclean  cans;  to  keep 
the  outside  of  cans  clean  and  bright,  and  when  not  in  use  to  keep  the  cana 
upside  down,  with  covers  over,  on  a  rack  provided  for  this  purpose  in  the 
milk  house; 


145 

To  provide  the  milk  house  with  clean  surroundings,  lighted  and  ventilated, 
of  suitable  capacity  and  not  connected  with  any  stable  or  kitchen;  to  be 
painted  or  whitewashed  inside,  to  be  used  for  the  safe  keeping  of  milk 
and  for  no  other  purpose,  except  for  storing  milk  utensils; 

To  have  the  milking  done  with  dry  hands,  in  the  most  cleanly  manner; 
immediately  after  milking  to  remove  the  milk,  including  strippings,  to  the 
milk  house,  strain  it  through  a  100  mesh  wire  cloth  strainer,  and  to  cool 
the  milk  to  58  degrees  w'ithin  45  minutes  from  the  time  it  is  drawn  from 
the  cow,  and  to  keep  the  can  of  milk  in  the  vat  of  water  until  time  for 
delivery;  to  prevent  the  milk  from  freezing  in  temperature  to  exceed  58 
degrees  between  45  minutes  after  drawing  from  the  cows  and  when  delivered 
at  the  Company's  plant,  to  which  place  it  shall  be  transported  on  a  spring 
wagon,  covered  with  a  clean  canvass;  to  not  mix  evening's  and  morning's 
milk,  except  the  remnants  of  each  milking;  to  not  deliver  the  milk  from  a 
cow  that  has  calf  within  ten  days  or  from  a  cow  which  will  calf  within  sixty 
days,  or  from  any  other  cow  in  an  unhealthy  condition; 

To  whitewash  the  cow  stables,  sides,  ceilings  and  stalls,  thoroughly  through- 
out, within  thirty  days  after  signing  this  contract; 

To  not  feed  the  cow  wet  brewery  or  distillery  grain  or  such  ensilage,  or 
such  feed  as  will  impart  a  disagreeable  flavor  or  odor  to  the  milk; 

To  immediately  notify  the  Company  in  case  of  any  sickness  or  disease 
among  the  cows  of  the  herd; 

To  immediately  notify  the  Company  if  any  member  of  his  or  her  house- 
hold, or  any  member  of  any  family  occupying  the  premises  on  which  the 
milk  is  produced,  has  any  infectious  or  contagious  disease,  or  any  person 
who  may  be  assisting  in  the  work  of  the  dairy  who  comes  in  contact  with 
any  infectious  or  contagious  disease. 

When  such  notification  is  given  and  the  Company  should  deem  it  necessary 
to  discontinue  to  receive  the  milk  of  the  said  dairy,  the  Company  will 
remunerate  the  dairyman  for  unavoidable  loss  incurred  on  the  milk  during 
the  period  of  sickness,  or  until  the  danger  of  contagion  has  been  removed. 

IT  is  MUTUALLY  AGREED  that  the  representatives  of  the  company  shall  at 
reasonable  hours  have  access  to  and  the  right  to  examine  the  cows,  cow 
stables,  milk  house,  feed,  dairy  utensils  and  place  for  keeping  the  same; 
and  that  if  any  cow  is  found  to  be  suffering  with  any  disease  which,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Company's  representative,  would  tend  to  produce  unwhole- 
some milk,  such  cow  shall  be  removed  from  the  herd,  either  temporarily  or 
permanently,  as  may  be  necessary  to  ensure  wholesome  milk;  but  there  shall 
be  no  needless  sacrifice  in  any  herd,  and  sufficient  evidence  of  the  existence 
of  the  disease  shall  be  produced  to  warrant  the  removal  of  any  cow; 

That  should  the  dairyman  be  unable  to  make  deliveries  of  milk  to  the 
Company,  because  of  the  action  of  legal  authorities,  he  or  she  will  give 
notice  to  the  Company  and  shall  be  under  no  obligation  to  deliver  milk 
to  the  Company;  if,  because  of  the  conditions  caused  by  the  elements,  floods 
or  fire,  accident,  action  of  legal  authorities,  adverse  legislation,  interruption 
of  railroad  transportation  facilities,  strikes  or  inability  to  secure  necessary 
supplies,  the  Company  be  prevented  or  hindered  from  operating  its  plant, 
manufacturing  or  preparing  the  milk  for  shipment,  or  shipping  or  marketing 
its  products,  the  Company  shall  give  notice  of  the  fact  and  shall  thereafter 
be  under  no  obligation  to  receive  milk  from  the  dairyman,  but  at  the  end  of 


146 

such  period  or  periods'  and  when  normal  conditions  are  restored,  the  parties 
to  this  agreement  shall,  and  are  hereby  bound  to,  continue  the  performance 
of  this  agreement. 

That  failure  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  this  agreement  by  the 
dairyman  shall  be  sufficient  warrant  for  the  company  to  refuse  to  receive 
milk  from  the  dairyman,  and  in  such  event  the  Company  shall  in  no  way 
be  held  liable  for  any  losses  sustained;  that  the  Company  has  the  right 
to  cancel  this  contract  in  case  it  has  satisfactory  evidence  that  adulterated, 
skimmed  or  contaminated  milk  is  being  delivered  or  offered  for  delivery 
by  the  dairyman. 

THE  COMPANY  AGREES  to  buy  from  the  dairyman  the  number  of  pounds  of 
milk  assigned  individually,  if  produced  and  handled  as  specified  herein;  wash 
and  clean  at  its  plant  the  inside  of  all  cans  in  which  milk  is  delivered;  to 
pay  on  the  15th  day  of  the  month  following  of  delivery,  according  to  butter 
fat  test,  the  price  per  100  pounds  of  milk  as  set  forth  in  attached  rider, 
which  is  a  part  of  this  contract.  Such  butter  fats  to  be  determined  by  an 
average  test  made  by  the  Babcock  test  four  times  monthly. 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  April,   1916. 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  May,  1916. 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  June,  1916. 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  July,   1916 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  August,    1916. 

Daily  average  to  be  delivered Ibs.  for  month  of  September,  1916. 

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  parties  have  hereunto  interchangeably  set  their 
hands  the  day  and  year  first  above  written. 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  CO. 

BORDEN  PRICES 
SUMMER  CONTRACT  PRICES,  1916 

Short  Haul  —  Eastern  Route. 
Butter  fat  3.3       3.4       3.5       3.6       3.7       3.8       3.9       4.0       4.1 

April $1.40  $1.43  $1.46  $1.49  $1.52  $1.55  $1.58  $1.61  $1.64 

May 1.15     1.18  1.21     1.24  1.27  1.30     1.33  1.36     1.39 

June.. 1.09     1.12  1.15     1.18  1.21  1.24     1.27  1.30     1.33 

July 1.35     1.38  1.41     1.44  1.47  1.50     1.53  1.56     1.59 

August 1.51     1.54  1.57     1.60  1.63  1.66     1.69  1.72     1.75 

September 1.60     1.63  1.66     1.69  1.72  1.75     1.78  1.81     1.84 


Butter  fat  4.2       4.3       4.4       4.5       4.6       4.7       4.8       4.9       5.0 


April    .  .     .        .  .  . 

$1 

67 

$1.70 

$1.73 

$1 

76 

$1.79 

$1.82 

$1.85 

$1.88 

$1.91 

May 

.      .        1 

4?, 

1.45 

1.48 

1 

51 

1.54 

1.57 

1.60 

1.63 

1.69 

June 

1 

36 

1.39 

1.42 

1 

45 

1.48 

1.51 

1.54 

1.57 

1.66 

July.  . 

1 

6?, 

1.65 

1.68 

1 

.71 

1.74 

1.77 

1.80 

1.83 

1.86 

August  

1 

78 

1.81 

1.84 

1 

.87 

1.90 

1.93 

1.96 

1.99 

fl.Ofl 

September  . 

1 

.87 

1.90 

1.93 

1 

.96 

1.99 

2.02 

2.05 

2.08 

2.11 

The  above  prices  will  be  paid  to  dairymen  where  they  maintain,  during  this 
contract,  conditions  scoring  not  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equip- 
ment and  forty-three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  according  to  the  New  York 
Department  of  Health  score  card,  as  scored  by  the  company's  representatives. 
Dairymen  scoring  less  than  twenty-five  (  25  )  per  cent,  on  equipment  and  forty- 
three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  will  receive  ten  cents  (lOc)  per  100  pounds 
less  than  the  above  schedule. 


147 

These  prices,  as  arranged  here,  may  seem,  from  casual  inspection,  to  be  a 
radical  departure  from  the  traditional  method  of  making  milk  quotations. 
It  will  be  found,  however,  that  they  represent  a  forward  step  in  the  direction 
we  have  always  been  working  and  that  is  toward  the  condition  under  which 
t'ach  producer  receives  pay  in  exact  accordance  with  the  quality.  The  aim  of 
these  prices'  is  to  be  minutely  equitable  and  at  the  same  time  make  it  profit- 
able for  the  producer  to  strive  for  quality. 

BORDEX'S  FARM  PRODUCTS  DIVISION. 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  COMPANY  CONTRACT  AT  CANDOR 
STATION,  TIOGA  COUNTY 

This  Agreement  dated  the  16th  day  of  March,  1916,  between  the  Alexander 
i.'ampbell  Milk  Company  of  802  Fulton  street,  Brooklyn,  and  each  of  the 
undersigned  farmers  of  Candor  in  the  State  of  Ne\v  York. 

We,  the  undersigned  farmers  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  amount  herein- 
after named  to  be  paid  to  us  respectively,  agree  to  supply  the  Alexander 
Campbell  Milk  Company  with  the  entire  yield  of  milk  and  with  all  the  cream 
produced  on  our  farms,  at  Candor,  to  be  delivered  under  the  conditions 
following:  That  is  to  say,  that  all  the  milk  should  be  absolutely  pure, 
containing  no  less  than  11^  per  cent,  solids,  and  produced  in  places-  that 
nre  scored  not  less  than  20  per  cent,  for  equipment  and  not  less  than  35  per 
cent,  for  methods  by  the  inspector  of  the  Department  of  Health  of  the  City 
of  New  York.  When  the  milk  of  any  producer  is  found  below  the  standard, 
in  solid,  a  sample  is  taken  immediately,  and  if  the  sample  is  also  low,  the 
company  will  refuse  to  receive  milk  of  such  producer,  until  he  shall  furnish 
to  the  required  standard.  If  at  any  later  period  the  same  producer  shall 
be  found  delivering  milk  under  such  standard,  his  milk  shall  be  absolutely 
refused.  That  all  of  the  milk  shall  comply  in  every  other  respect  with 
the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  said  health  department  and  the  laws  of  the 
State  of  New  York.  Night's  milk  must  be  cooled,  so  as  to  be  delivered  at 
the  creamery  below  58  per  cent.  Fahrenheit.  Morning's  milk  will  be  accepted 
warm  for  delivery  before  8  a.  m.  All  morning's  milk  delivered  after  8  a.  m. 
must  be  cooled  so  as  to  be  delivered  not  above  60  degrees  Fahrenheit.  This 
agreement  shall  continue  in  force  for  the  six  months  beginning  April  11,  1916, 
and  ending  September  30,  1916,  during  which  time  the  said  company  shall  pay 
the  following  prices  per  100  pounds  of  milk: 

April $1  32 

May 1  07 

June 101 

July 127 

August , 1  43 

September 1  52 

In  addition  to  these  prices  the  premium  of  ten  cents  per  100  pounds  of 
milk  will  be  paid  to  all  producers  whose  farms  shall  score  not  less  than 
25  per  cent,  for  equipment  and  not  less  than  43  per  cent,  for  methods. 

A  further  premium  will  be  paid  of  three  cents  per  100  pounds  of  milk 
for  each  and  every  point  or  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent.,  it  shall  test  above 
3.7  per  cent,  butter  fat,  a  deduction  will  be  made  of  three  cents  per  100 
pounds  of  milk  for  each  and  every  point  or  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent.,  that 


148 

the  milk  shall  test  below  3.7  per  cent,  of  butter  fat,  and  an  additional 
premium  of  five  cents  per  100  pounds  of  milk  will  also  be  paid  to  all  farmers 
whose  milk  shall  show  a  bacterial  count  of  not  exceeding  40,000  per  cubic 
centimeter.  Failure  to  comply  with  the  requirements  of  this  agreement  by 
the  farmer  shall  be  sufficient  warrant  for  the  company  to  refuse  milk  from 
such  farmers  until  such  time  as  the  conditions  of  the  agreement  are  complied 
with  and  in  such  event  the  company  shall  not  be  held  responsible  for  any 
losses  sustained. 

That  the  company  has  the  right  to  cancel  this  contract  in  case  it  is 
satisfied  that  adulterated,  skimmed  or  contaminated  milk  is  being  delivered  or 
offered  for  delivery  by  he  farmer,  or  that  such  farmer  shall  neglect  or  refuse 
to  carry  out  the  terms  or  conditions  herein  stated. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  should  any  serious  interruption  occur,  caused  by 
fire  or  accident,  or  should  the  means  of  transportation  be  interrupted,  this 
company  will  immediately  give  notice  of  the  fact  and  it  shall  be  under  no 
obligation  to  receive  milk  from  the  undersigned  farmers  while  such  inter- 
ruption continues.  The  said  company  will  make  a  payment  for  these  supplies 
on  the  10th  day  of  each  month,  as  heretofore. 

Witnesses  the  hands  of  said  parties. 

(Signed)  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  CO., 

Per  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL,  Prest. 
DAIRYMEN, 

(Signed)     J.  D.  VAN  SCOT  and  eleven  others. 

The  station  agent  testified : 

Eleven  signed.  The  rest  didn't  sign.  We  received  milk  from  37  dairies. 
On  July  1,  1916,  I  received  the  following  letter: 

ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  Co. 
802  Fulton  Street 

BROOKLYN,  July  1,  1916. 
dreamery  Manager,  Candor,  N.  Y.: 

Patrons  of  the  Alexander  Campbell  Milk  Co.  are  hereby  notified  that  the 
company  will  make  and  pay  an  increase  of  ten  cents  per  ioO  pounds  of  milk 
above  the  contract  prices  for  all  milk  received  at  your  creamery  station 
during  the  past  month,  June,  1916. 

(Signed)     ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  CO. 

I  did  not  receive  such  a  letter  for  the  May  milk.  I  did  for  the  April  milk. 
We  did  not  increase  the  May  price.  I  have  not  got  any  such  letter  for  the 
July  milk.  Most  of  the  patrons  got  the  B  milk  prices.  The  farms  are 
rated  by  Mr.  Fish.  The  B  and  C  milk  all  goes  together  and  is  pasteurized 
in  Brooklyn.  It  is  shipped  in  the  same  cans. 


MEMORANDUM  AND  AGREEMENT  made  this day  of  March,  1916,  by  and 

between  the  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson-Decker  Co.,  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
party  of  the  first  part,  and  the  undersigned  producers  of  milk  in  Malone, 
State  of  New  York,  parties  of  the  second  part.  The  first  party  agrees  to  buy 
from  the  second  parties  and  the  second  parties  each  for  himself  agrees  to 
sell  all  of  the  good,  merchantable  cow's  milk  he  or  she  may  produce  from 
April  1,  1916,  to  October  1,  1916,  and  deliver  it  fresh,  clean,  sweet,  of  good 


149 

flavor,  satisfactory  to  the  first  party  and  the  Board  of  Health  of  the  City  of 
New  York  at  the  creamery  of  the  first  party  and  in  such  manner  and  condi- 
tion as  the  first  party  may  prescribe. 

Second:  First  party  agrees  to  pay  in  addition  to  stated  prices,  3  cents 
a  point  per  hundred  pounds  for  butter  fat  from  3.8  to  5  per  cent.  There  will 
be  a  deduction  of  3  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  each  one-tenth  per  cent, 
below  3.8. 

Third:  The  above  tests  are  to  be  made  on  composite  samples  taken  daily 
and  tested  three  times  a  month.  The  average  of  these  three  tests  each  month 
to  be  the  basis  on  which  premiums  are  paid. 

Fourth :  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  of  10  cents  per  hundred 
pounds  to  all  producers  who  show  a  total  score  of  68  per  cent,  or  over.  The 
total  score  must  consist  of  at  least  43  per  cent,  on  methods  and  25  per  cent,  on 
equipment. 

Fifth:  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  each  month  for  all  milk  deliv- 
ered to  its  plant  at  a  temperature  of  50  degrees  or  below,  each  and  every  day 
during  the  month,  of  5  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  months  of  April,  May 
and  June,  and  13  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  months  of  July,  August 
and  September. 

Sixth:  The  first  party  will  sell  skim  milk  to  second  party  at  15  cents  per 
can  of  40  quarts,  but  reserves  the  right  during  the  months  of  August  and 
September  to  stop  making  skim  for  sale,  so  that  they  may  ship  all  of  the 
milk  to  New  York. 

Seventh :  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  the  second  party  on  or  before 
the  loth  day  of  each  month  for  such  milk  so  delivered  during  the  preceding, 
month  and  not  to  be  less  than  contract  prices  for  those  six  months.  Prices 
per  100  pounds: 

April $1  40 

May 1  30 

June 1  15 

July 1  30 

August 1  45 

September 1  50 

NOTE. —  These  prices  were  voluntarily  increased  by  the  Company  later  to 
read  as  follows: 

April $1  50 

May 1  30 

June 1  25 

July 1  40 

August 1  45 

September 1  50 

The  foregoing  contract  was  signed  by  twenty-five  dairymen  in 
the  Malone  territory. 

In  the  spring  of  1915,  'Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Com- 
pany offered  the  following  contract  to  their  patrons  at  South  Kort- 
wright,  "N".  Y. 


150 

MEMORANDUM  OF  AGREEMENT  made  this  15th  day  of  March,  1916,  by  and 
between  the  Sheffield  Farms,  Slaw  son -Decker  Company,  of  the  State  of  New 
York,  party  of  the  first  part,  and  the  undersigned  producers  of  milk  at  South 
Kortwright,  State  of  New  York,  parties  of  the  second  part: 

First:  The  first  party  agrees  to  buy  from  the  second  parties,  and  the 
second  parties  each  for  himself  or  herself  agree  to  sell  to  the  first  party  all 
the  good  merchantable  cow's  milk  he  or  she  may  produce  at  South  Kortwright, 
aforesaid,  from  April  1st,  1916,  to  October  1st,  1916,  and  deliver  it  fresh, 
clean,  and  sweet,  of  good  flavor,  satisfactory  to  the  first  party,  to  the  board  of 
health  of  the  city  of  New  York  and  to  the  Agricultural  Department  of  New 
York  State,  at  the  creamery  of  thie  party  of  the  first  part  at  South  Kort- 
wright, at  such  time  and  in  such  manner  and  condition  as  the  first  party  may 
prescribe. 

Second:  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  in  addition  to  stated  price,  4  cent* 
per  hundred  pounds  for  butter-fat  from  4.5  per  dent,  to  5.3  per  cent.  The 
first  premium  of  4  cents  per  hundred  Ibs.  for  4.6  milk  and  the  maximum  pre- 
mium of  32  cents  per  hundred  Ibs.  to  be  paid  for  milk  testing  5.3  per  cent. 
Deductions  to  be  made  at  3  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  each  one-tenth  under 
4.5  per  cent. 

Third:  For  milk  delivered  during  the  months  of  April,  May  and  June, 
1916,  the  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  second  parties  an  additional  5  cents  per 
hundred  pounds,  and  for  milk  delivered  during  the  months  of  July,  August 
and  September,  1916,  the  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  second  party  an  addi- 
tional 20  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  milk  delivered  at  a  temperature 
of  50  degrees  or  lower  when  dumped  in  weight  pan  altogether.  This  applies 
for  the  full  month  only  and  not  for  any  period  thereof. 

Fourth:  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  an  additional  10  cents  per  hundred 
pounds  for  all  milk  delivered  from  farms  the  score  of  which  shall  be  classed 
by  the  board  of  health  of  the  city  of  New  York  as  grade  "A"  score  ( at  present 
68  —  consisting  of  43  on  methods  and  25  on  equipment,  or  better ) .  And  for 
all  milk  delivered  from  such  farms  (classed  by  the  board  of  health  of  the  city 
of  New  York  as  grade  "A"  score)  the  average  monthly  bacterial  count  of 
which  shall  be  100,000  or  less,  an  additional  15  cents  per  hundred  pounds  will 
be  paid. 

Fifth:  The  above  butter-fat  tests  are  to  be  made  on  composite  samples 
taken  daily  and  tested  three  times  a  month.  The  average  of  these  three  tests 
each  month  to  be  the  basis  on  which  premiums  are  paid. 

Sixth:  The  first  party  and  its  authorized  agents  and  employees  shall  have 
the  liberty  to  inspect  the  cows  and  stables  of  every  second  party  at  any  time 
during  this  contract. 

Seventh:  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  the  second  parties  on  or  before 
the  15th  day  of  each  month  for  such  milk  so  delivered  the  preceding  month 
and  pay  not  less  than  the  following  prices  for  this  six  months: 


151 

PRICES  PER  HUNDRED  POUNDS,  1916 

April $1  60     lOc  additional  paid 

May 1  30     lOc  additional  paid 

June 1  30     lOc  additional  paid 

July 1  50 

August 1  65 

September 1  70 

NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. —  Ten  cents  additional  was  actually  paid  by  this  Com- 
pany for  the  months  of  April,  May  and  June. 

On  March  15,  1916,  the  Locust  Farms  Company  established  its 
prices  as  appears  by  the  following  letter: 

LOCUST  FARMS, 
458  Tenth  Avenue, 

NEW  YORK,  March  15,  1916. 
Mr.  M.  STAR,  Billings,  N.  Y. : 

DEAR  SIR. —  The  price  for  5  per  cent,  milk  eligible  for  grade  A  pasteurized 
for  the  six  summer  months  of  1916  will  be  as  follows: 

April $2  06  per  cwt. 

May 1  81  per  cwt. 

June 1  75  per  cwt. 

July 1  96  per  cwt. 

August 2  12  per  cwt. 

September 221  per  cwt. 

With  a  deduction  of  3  cents  per  cwt.  for  each  one-tenth  per  cent,  butter-fat. 
Milk  not  eligible  as  grade  A  pasteurized  will  toe  taken  at  15  cents  per  cwt. 
less  than  these  prices,  so  long  as  the  Department  of  Health  will  permit  us  to 
handle  it  through  the  same  creamery. 

Yours  truly, 

LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY, 

A.  CUDDEBACK,  President. 

In  March,  1916,  the  Farmers'  Co-operative  Milk  Company,  Inc., 
issued  the  following  contract  for  the  station  at  Poughkeepsie,  IN".  Y. 

FARMERS'  CO-OPERATIVE  MILK  CO.,  INC. 
729-731  Main  St.,  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y. 

THIS  AGREEMENT  made  this  March,  1916,  between  the  Farmers'  Co-opera- 
tive Co.,  Inc.,  party  of  the  first  part,  hereinafter  known  as  the  Company,  each 
of  the  undersigned,  parties  of  the  second  part,  hereinafter  known  as  the 
Dairymen. 

WITNESSETH,  that  the  parties  hereto,  for  and  in  consideration  of  the 
sum  of  One  dollar,  each  to  the  other  in  hand  paid,  receipt  of  which  is  hereby 
acknowledged,  each  agree  individually  and  not  for  others  to  perform  the 
agreement  herein  specified. 

"  THE  DAIRYMEN  AGREE  "  to  sell  and  deliver  daily  to  the  Company's 
plant  at  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y.,  before  9  a.  m.  (barring  accidents  or  storms  that 
render  highway  travel  slow  or  impossible)  milk  produced  by  his  or  her  or 
their  dairy  for  a  term  of  one  year  from  April  1st,  1916,  the  milking  of  the 


152 

moning  of  delivery,  and  the  evening  preceding.  The  milk  so  delivered  to  be 
produced  from  cows  free  from  disease,  and  to  be  sweet,  unadulterated,  and 
within  the  standards  prescribed  by  law  for  grade  "  B  "  milk,  raw. 

THAT  THE  evening's  milk  immediately  after  being  drawn  from  the  cows 
shall  be  cooled  to  a  temperature  not  exceeding  54  degrees  Fahrenheit,  and  the 
morning's  milk  cooled  to  temperature  not  to  exceed  62  degrees  before  delivery 
is  made. 

TO  MAINTAIN  a  dairy  scoring  not  less  than  23  per  cent,  on  equipment  and 
37  per  cent,  on  methods,  as  scored  by  the  Company's  or  City  of  Poughkeepsie 
Eepresentative  on  the  score  card  adopted  by  the  Department  of  Health  of  the 
city  of  Poughkeepsie. 

TO  MAINTAIN  at  all  times  a  bacteria  count  within  the  standard  (200,000 
per  cubic  centimeter)  as  set  by  the  law  for  grade  "B"  milk,  raw. 

THAT  EXAMINATIONS  by  which  the  bacteria  counts  are  determined  shall 
be  made  by  the  Company's  or  Poughkeepsie  City  Bacteriologist  from  compo- 
site samples  taken  from  evening's  and  morning's  milk  delivered  to  the  plant 
of  the  Company. 

THAT  THE  NUMBER  of  bacteria  examinations  made  in  any  month  this 
contract  prevails  shall  be  as  many  as  is  required  to,  and  in  the  judgment  of 
the  Company  tend  to  assist  the  producer  to  maintain  a  bacteria  count  within 
the  maximum  allowed  (200,000),  and  to  earn  the  premiums  offered. 

TO  IMMEDIATELY  notify  the  Company  in  case  of  any  disease  or  sick- 
ness among  the  cows  of  the  herd. 

TO  IMMEDIATELY  notify  the  Company  if  any  member  of  his  or  her  house- 
hold, or  any  member  or  any  family  occupying  the  premises  on  which  the  milk 
is  produced,  has  any  infectious  or  contagious  disease,  or  any  person  who  may 
be  assisting  in  the  work  of  the  dairy  who  comes  in  contact  with  any  infectious 
or  contagious  disease. 

When  such  notification  is  given  and  the  Company  shall  deem  it  necessary 
to  discontinue  to  receive  the  milk  of  said  dairy,  the  Company  shall  remuner- 
ate the  Dairyman  FOR  UNAVOIDABLE  LOSS  INCURRED  on  the  milk  dur- 
ing the  period  of  sickness  or  until  the  danger  of  contagion  has  been  removed. 

To  permit  the  representatives  of  the  Company,  City  and  State  Department 
of  Health  access  to,  and  the  right  to  examine  the  stables,  utensils,  premises 
and  cows  (physically,  and  that  if  any  cow  is  found  to  be  suffering  from  a 
disease,  which  in  the  judgment  of  the  Company's  representative  would  tend 
to  produce  unwholesome  milk,  such  a  cow  shall  be  removed  from  the  herd, 
either  temporarily  or  permanently,  as  may  be  necessary  to  ensure  wholesome 
milk,  sufficient  evidence  of  the  existence  of  disease  shall  be  produced  to  war- 
rant the  removal  of  any  cow. 

THAT  FAILURE  to  maintain  grade  "B"  standards,  and  to  fulfill  this 
agreement  by  the  Dairyman  shall  be,  upon  necessary  proof  to  the  producer, 
sufficient  warrant  for  the  Company  to  refuse  to  receive  milk  from  the  Dairy- 
man, and  in  such  event  the  Company  shall  in  no  way  be  held  liable  for  any 
losses  sustained. 

IT  IS  FURTHER  agreed  by  both  parties  that  in  the  event  the  Company's 
home  plant  should  be  destroyed  by  fire,  explosions,  tornadoes  or  any  act 
beyond  the  Company's  control,  which  would  render  the  plant  unsafe  for  per- 
sons to  labor  therein,  the  Company  shall  then  be  temporarily  released  from 


/ 


!*•*' 


CUCir 


\\ 

§£ 
•a 


153 

receiving  or  paying  for  the  dairyman's  milk,  providing  speedy  preparations 
are  at  once  started  to  effect  suitable  quarters  to  resume  receiving  tlie  milk  or 
that  if  the  dairyman's  cow  barns  or  cows  are  likewise  destroyed,  he  or  she  shall 
be  released  to  furnish  milk  under  this  contract  until  such  time  as  normal 
conditions  have  been  restored. 

"THE  COMPANY  AGREES"  to  buy  from  the  dairymen  and  to  pay  for 
milk  produced  and  delivered  as  herein  specified,  and  testing  4  per  cent.  fat. 
the  prices  herein  quoted  per  100  pounds. 

TO  PAY  an  additional  2  cents  per  100  pounds  for  every  one-tenth  of  1  per 
cent,  the  milk  contains  over  and  above  4  per  cent,  fat  and  make  the  same 
deductions  from  prices  quoted  (2  cents  per  100  pounds)  for  every  one-tenth 
of  one  per  cent,  the  milk  is  found  to  contain  less  than  4  per  cent.  fat. 

TO  PAY  in  addition  to  the  flat  prices  quoted,  10  cents  (lOc.)  per  100 
pounds  for  the  milk  delivered  by  dairymen  who  maintain  dairy  conditions  scor- 
ing not  less  than  Twenty-five  per  cent,  on  equipment  and  Forty-three  per  cent, 
on  methods,  according  to  the  Poughkeepsie  Department  of  Health  score  card 
as  scored  by  the  Company's  or  City  of  Poughkeepsie  representative,  together 
with  the  bacteria  count  within  160,000. 

TO  MAKE  payments  on  the  16th  day  of  the  month  following  month  of 
delivery. 

Prices  Per  100  Pounds  (Without  Premiums) 

Month. 
April. 
May.  . 
June.  . 
July.  . 
Aug.  . 
Sept,  . 


IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  parties  have  hereunto  interchangeably  set 
their  hands  the  day  and  year  first  above  written. 

FARMERS'  COOPERATIVE  MILK  CO.,  INC. 

By 

Dairymen. 

To  Producers 

At  the  close  of  the  business  year  whatever  surplus  shall  have  accumulated 
will  be  apportioned  according  to  section  3  of  the  By-Laws  and  the  Laws  gov- 
erning such  Cooperative  Companies. 

At  the  same  time  this  company  issued  a  contract  for  its  patrons 
at  Wappingers  Falls,  N".  Y.,  on  the  same  terms,  except  as  to  prices. 
The  prices  in  the  Wappinger  Falls  contract  were  as  follows : 


Per  Cwt. 
$1  75 

Month. 
Oct 

Per  Cwt. 

$2  10 

1  55 

Nov    .  . 

2  10 

1  45 

Dec 

2  00 

2  10 

Jan  

1  90 

2  10 

Feb  

1  85 

2  10 

Mar  

1  85 

154 


April.  . 

Per  cwt. 
$1  70 

May  

1  40 

_        V 

June  

1  30 

July  

1  70 

August  

1  90 

September  

1  90 

October  

2  00 

November  

2  00 

December  

2  00 

January  , 

1  90 

February  

1  80 

March  

1  80 

In  March,  1916,  the  O.  A.  Weatherly  &  Co.,  of  Milford,  Otsego 
county,  issued  the  following  contract  proposition  : 


EXHIBIT  NO.  146 
MILK  PRICES  FOB  1916 

0.  A.  Weatherly  &  Co.  agree  to  pay  the  same  as  the  Borden's  schedule. 
No  reduction  below  3.3  per  cent,  butter  fat  and  for  all  milk  testing  above 
3.3  per  cent,  there  is  an  addition  of  three  cents  for  every  one-tenth  of  one 
per  cent,  butter  fat. 


April 

May 

June 

July 

August 1.41 

September 1.50 


3.3 

$1.30 
1.05 
.99 
1.25 


3.4 

$1.33 
1.08 
1.02 
1.28 
1.44 
1.53 


3.5 

$1.36 
1.11 
1.05 
1.31 
1.47 
1.56 


3.6 
$1.39 
1.14 
1.08 
1.34 
1.50 
1.59 


3.7 
$1.42 
1.17 
1.11 
1.37 
1.53 
1.62 


3.8 
$1.45 
1.20 
1.14 
1.40 
1.56 
1.65 


3.9 
$1.48 
1.23 
1.17 
1.43 
1.59 
1.68 


April 

May 

June 

July 

August.  .  . 
September. 


4.0         t 

LI 

± 

L2 

4.3 

4.4 

4.5 

$1.51     $1 

L.54 

$] 

L.57 

$1.60 

$1.63 

$1.66 

1.26 

.29 

.32 

1.35 

1.38 

1.41 

1.20 

.23 

L.26 

1.29 

1.32 

1.35 

1.46 

.49 

.52 

1.55 

1.58 

1.61 

1.62 

.65 

.68 

1.71 

1.74 

1.77 

1.71 

.74 

L.77 

1.80 

1.83 

1.86 

All  dairymen  not  scoring  25  per  cent,  on  equipment  and  43  per  cent,  on 
methods  according  to  New  York  Department  score  card  receive  ten  cents  per 
hundred  less. 

If  any  of  our  patrons  wish  we  will  pay  the  same  as  the  International  Milk 
Products  Company,  of  Cooperstown,  N.  Y. 

Or  we  will  go  by  the  cheese  prices>  for  eight  months  if  any  of  our  patrons 
wish  that  way.  We  will  allow  2.7  pounds  of  cheese  for  each  pound  of  butter 
fat  and  pay  the  highest  fancy  New  York  quotations,  less  $1.35  for  each  100 
pounds  of  cheese  for  making,  but  will  not  deduct  any  freight  or  commission. 
There  will  be  no  deduction  on  barn  score  where  you  take  the  last  named 
proposition.  Unless  otherwise  notified,  we  will  pay  by  the  Borden's  schedule. 


155 

In  September,  1915,  the  Harlem  Dairy  Products  Company  of 
Clinton,  IN".  Y.,  issued  the  following  contract  or  notice: 

OFFICE  OF  HARLEM  DAIRY  PRODUCTS  Co., 

Clinton. 

Commencing  October  1st  and  for  six  months  thereafter,  the  Borden  prices, 
together  with  the  comparative  prices  per  100  pounds  at  32-cent  zone,  will  be 
as  follows: 

October $1  70 

November 1  80 

December 1  80 

January 1  75 

February 1  65 

March  .  .  1  60 


October $1  80 


November  

1  90 

December  

1  90 

January  

1  85 

February  

1  75 

March  

1  70 

Average,  $1.81  2/3  per  100  pounds. 

All  night's  milk  must  be  clean  and  cooled  below  60  degrees  when  delivered 
to  creamery,  and  all  morning's  milk  can  be  delivered  within  two  hours  after 
milking  and  if  it  is  not  delivered  within  that  time,  it  must  be  cooled  the  same 
as  nght  milk.  All  barns  must  be  kept  clean  to  pass  inspection  of  the  Health 
Department  of  New  York. 

HARLEM  DAIRY  PRODUCTS  CO., 

Clinton,  N.  Y. 

The  same  company  on  April  1,  1915,  issued  the  following  card: 

Prices  for  the  next  six  months  as  follows: 

Per  100  pounds 

April $1  40 

May 115 

June 110 

July 1  25 

August 1  40 

September 1  80 


NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. — It  will  be  observed  from  the  Borden  contract  above 
that  the  comparative  figures  used  on  the  above  card  were  about  two  cents 
a  hundred  pound  under  the  Borden  price  for  3.4  milk,  and  that  the  Harlem 
Dairy  Products  Company  were  four  cents  a  hundred  pound  under  the  Borden 
price  for  3.8  milk.  3.8  milk  would  be  a  low  average  for  the  winter  season. 


156 

FORT  PLAIN  MILK  COMPANY 

The  Fort  Plain  Milk   Company,   a  co-operative  company,   in 
March,  1916,  issued  the  following  contract: 

FORT  PLAIN  MILK  COMPANY 

The  following  prices  for  tlie  coming  six  months  commencing  April  1st,  191G: 

Per  cwt. 


May  

1  10 

June  

1  05 

July  

1  20 

August  

1  35 

September  

1  45 

NOTE  BY  COMMITTEE. — This  price,  as  published  by  this  company  through  the 
six  months,  was  about  ten  cents  less  than  the  Borden  price  for  3.3  milk. 
The  same  company  for  1915  issued  the  following  card : 

FORT  PLAIN  MILK  COMPANY 

The  following  prices  for  the  coming  six  months  commencing  April  1st,  1915: 


April  

Per  cwt. 
$1  25 

May  

1  00 

June  

1  00 

July  

1  10 

August  

1  25 

September  

1  35 

October  

1  75 

November.  . 

1  80 

December 

1  80 

1916  January  

1  80 

February    . 

1  70 

March  

1  60 

This  company  has  several  outlying  stations  where  milk  is  col- 
lected. 

The  Fort  Plain  Milk  Company  is  a  co-operative  company,  that 
is,  one  owned  and  operated  by  dairymen.  Undoubtedly,  these  are 
as  injurious  milk  prices  as  appear  in  the  records  of  this  Com- 
mittee; that  is,  injurious  to  the  milk  producer.  The  stock  is 
largely  owned  by  dairymen  and  the  charge  was  made  at  the  hear- 
ings of  this  Committee  that  the  men  who  owned  the  farm  owned  the 
stock  in  the  company ;  that  a  great  many  of  the  farms  were  worked 
on  shares  by  tenant  farmers ;  by  paying  such  low  prices  for  milk, 
the  tenant  farmer  was  wronged  while  the  owners  of  the  stock  got 
large  returns  by  way  of  dividends.  It  was  admitted  by  the  oper- 


157 

a  tars  of  the  company  at  the  hearing  before  the  Committee  that  dur- 
ing 1915  and  1916  the  stock  had  earned  over  50  per  cent  profit, 
which,  of  course,  was  to  the  benefit  of  all  the  stockholders,  but  to 
the  great  injury  of  tenant  farmers  who  owned  no  stock,  but  de- 
livered their  milk  to  this  company.  It  was  shown  that  a  large  part 
of  this  milk  was  being  sold  at  comparatively  high  prices  to  Messrs. 
Brown  and  Bailey  at  Canajoharie,  !N".  Y.  That  a  dairymen's  plant 
does  not  always  do  justice  to  all  its  patrons  would  appear  to  be 
established  by  this  case.  Assume  that  the  owner  of  the  farm 
stipulates  in  his  contract  with  the  tenant  that  the  milk  must  be 
delivered  to  the  co-operative  station.  The  tenant  has  no  remedy 
but  to  carry  out  his  contract.  He  owns  no  stock  in  the  company, 
or  presumably  owns  none,  as  he  is  not  frequently  located  for  a 
long  period  of  time  in  a  particular  neighborhood.  A  comparison 
of  the  prices  paid  by  the  Fort  Plain  Milk  Company  with  those 
paid  by  the  Farmers'  Co-operative  Milk  Company  of  Poughkeepsie, 
show  a  remarkable  difference. 

Fort  Plain  Milk  Co.     Farmers*  Co-operative  Co. 

prices  at  Wappingers  Falls 

April ,               $1  30  $1  70 

May 1  10  1  40 

June 1  05  1  30 

July 1  20  1  70 

August 1  35  1  90 

September 1  45  1  90 


The  difference  in  location  of  these  two  companies  will  not  ex- 
plain the  difference  in  milk  values  paid.  The  International  Milk 
Products  Company  of  Cooperstown,  1ST.  Y.,  during  1915  paid  the 
following : 

Price  Test 

January $1.95  4. IS 

February 1.75  3.6 

March 1.70  3.5 

April 1 . 35  3.3 

May 1.19  3.7 

June 1.11  3.6 

July 1.27V2  3.65 

August 1.51%-  3.9 

September 1 .6iy2  3 .95 

October 1.9iy2  4.05 

November 2.13V2  4.45 

December.  .                                                                                         2.12  4.4 


158 


1916. 

January $1 . 93  4.1 

February 1 . 74^  3 . 65 

March 1.68  3.6 

April 1 . 52  3.7 

May 1.45  4.3 

June 1.42  4.2 

July 1.31  3.5 

NOTE. — The  above  prices  taken  from  the  statements  of  one  patron. 

On  October  15,  1915,  the  O.  E.  Weatherly  Company  issued  the 
fallowing  contract : 


To  our  Patrons: 


EXHIBIT  NO.  147 

MILFOBD,  N.  Y:,  October  15th,  1915. 


Several  of  our  patrons  have  asked  us  what  the  prices  were  going  to  be 
for  the  next  six  months,  and  would  say  they  will  be  the  same  as  the  Bordens 
for  the  same  quality  of  milk  and  same  to  be  delivered  according  to  the  regula- 
tions of  the  New  York  Department  of  Health. 

Following  are  the  Borden  prices: 

October,    1915 Grade  B  4%  per  hundred,  $1.90  Grade  C$1.80 

November,  1915 Grade  B  4%  per  hundred,  2.00  Grade  C  1.90 

December,   1915 Grade  B  4%  per  hundred,  2.00  Grade  C  1.90 

January,   1916 Grade  B  4%  per  hundred,  1.90  Grade  C  1.80 

February,  1916 Grade  B  4%  per  hundred,  1.85  Grade  C  1.75 

March,  1916 Grade  B  4%  '  per  hundred,  1 .80  Grade  C  1 .70 

For  all  milk  testing  under  four  per  cent,  there  will  be  a  reduction  of  three 
cents  for  every  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent,  butter  fat  and  for  all  milk  testing 
over  four  per  cent,  there  will  be  an  addition  of  three  cents  for  every  one-tenth 
of  one  per  cent,  butter  fat. 

The  New  York  Department  of  Health  regulations  are  this,  to  have  the  milk 
Grade  B  the  barn  must  score  at  least  68  points,  43  on  methods  and  25  on 
equipment,  and  Grade  C  must  score  at  least  40  points.  All  milk  must  be 
cooled  to  at  least  60  per  cent,  unless  delivered  before  8  a.  m. 

On  March  23,  1915,  we  received  notice  from  the  Department  as  follows: 
"That  no  milk  be  accepted  at  a  temperature  higher  than  60  per  cent.  During 
the  inspection  on  March  15th,  the  morning's  milk  was  taken  in  at  an  average 
of  70  per  cent  as  late  as  9:45  a.  m.  If  at' the  re-inspection  it  is  found  that 
any  uncooled  morning's  milk  is  received  later  than  8  a.  m.  the  dairy  pro- 
ducing same  will  be  ordered  excluded  at  once.  These  recommendations  must 
have  your  attention." 

Since  that  date  there  has  not  been  any  inspection  when  they  have  taken  the 
temperature  of  the  milk.  It  may  be  some  time  before  they  do  and  they  may 
do  it  in  the  near  future.  You  will  note  if  they  do  there  will  be  several  dairies 
that  will  not  come  up  to  these  requirements  and  if  they  are  strict  about  the 
matter  they  will  have  to  be  excluded  until  the  milk  is  cooled  as  directed.  We 
would  certainly  recommend  your  cooling  it  as  much  as  possible  at  least 
getting  the  animal  heat  out  of  the-  milk.  We  are  not  mentioning  these  mat- 
ters to  find  fault,  but  to  have  you  prepared  so  there  will  be  no  trouble  when 
there  is  a  re-inspection.  We  certainly  do  not  wish  to  have  any  of  our  patron* 


159 

excluded  from  shipping  their  milk,  but  if  we  should  continue  to  take  this 
milk  after  we  had  received  instruction  not  to  ship  same,  we  would  not  be 
allowed  to  ship  any  milk  to  New  York  City.  So  would  have  to  stop  taking 
the  milk  from  the  patrons  upon  re-inspections  that  were  ordered  stopped  by 
the  Department. 

This  is  beyond  our  jurisdiction  when  we  are  shipping  and  it  would  not  be 
possible  to  pay  the  above  prices,  as  you  all  know,  and  manufacture  the  milk 
into  either  butter  or  cheese.  In  the  near  future  there  will  be  a  re-inspection 
of  your  barns  and  as  found  when  inspected  the  prices  will  be  according,  that 
is,  whether  the  score  is  such  that  it  will  be  either  grade  B  or  grade  C. 

Don't  you  think  it  would  be  a  good  plan  to  commence  to  make  plans  to  put 
up  a  milk  house  and  also  a  house  to  store  a  little  ice  this  winter?  The  ex- 
pense would  not  be  very  much  and  you  would  certainly  appreciate  the  ice 
next  summer  when  it  was  hot  and  you  needed  to  cool  your  milk.  The  cost  of 
the  ice  would  practically  be  small  for  you  could  do  that  at  odd  times  when 
there  would  not  be  much  other  work.  Thanking  you  for  past  favors,  and 
patronage  and  trusting  \\e  merit  the  continuance  of  same,  we  remain, 

Very  truly  yours, 

(Signed)  0.  A.  WEATHERLY  &  Co. 

In  1916,  month  to  month,  the  Model  Dairy  Company  posted  the 
following  prices  at  the  station  at  Greenway,  Oneida  county,  per 
100  pounds: 

January $1.80 

February 1.75 

March ; 1.65 

April 1.50 

May,   1st  half    1.30 

May,   2nd  half    1.40 

June,  1st  half   1.20 

June,  2nd  half    1.30 

July,   1st  half    1.30 

July,  2nd  half   1.40 

STANDARD  DAIRY  COMPANY, 

611-613  East  12th  St. 

Sauquoit. 

NEW  YORK,  April  1,  1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  for  grade  B  is  $1.25  per  can. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

NEW  YORK,  May  1,  1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.12  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIBD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

June  1,  1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.05  per  can  of  40  quarts,  per  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 
President. 


160 

Sauquoit. 

July   1,   1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.15  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

NEW  YORK,  August  1,  1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.28  per  can  for  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

November  1,  1916. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.50  per  can  for  40  quarts  of  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

NEW  YORK,  October  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.40  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

NEW  YORK,  September  1st. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.23  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 
President. 

August  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.15  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

July  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  is  $1.05  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

STANDARD  DAIRY  COMPANY, 

W.  F.  BIRD, 
President. 

June  1,  1915. 
The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $  .96  per  can  of  40  quarts,  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

May  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1  per  can  for  grade  B  milk  testing  from 
3.3  to  3.6  butter  fat.  Five  cents  less  will  be  paid  for  every  point  below  3.3, 
and  3  cents  additional  for  every  point  above. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit. 

April  1,  1915. 


161 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.15  per  can  of  40  quarts  for  grade  B. 
An  addition  of  3  cents  per  can  will  be  paid  for  each  point  above  3.6  butter 
fat  and  3  cents  will  be  deducted  from  above  price  for  each  point  below  3.3 
butter  fat.  Tests  will  be  counted  on  monthly  average  and  the  Babcock  Tester. 

STANDARD  DAIRY  COMPANY, 

W.  F.  BIRD, 
President. 

NEW  YORK,  March  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  is  $1.44  per  can  of  40  quarts  for  grade  B  and  5  cents  less 
for  grade  C. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit 

February  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.48  per  can  of  40  quarts  delivered,  for 
grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 

President. 
Sauquoit 

January  1,  1915. 

The  price  of  milk  at  this  station  is  $1.56  per  can  of  40  cents  for  grade  B. 

W.  F.  BIRD, 
President. 

PRICES  PAID  TO  PATRONS  AT  BEAKE'S  DAIRY  AT  MASSENA,  N.  Y., 
FROM  APRIL  1,  1915,  TO  APRIL  1,  1916,  PER  100  POUNDS  OF  MILK. 

1915 

April $1.45 

May 1.25 

June 1.20 

July 1.20 

August 1.30 

September 1.40 

October 1.40 

November 1.65 

December 1.75 

1916 

January 1.85 

February,   Moth 1.85 

February,  16-31 1.75 

March 1.65 

April 1.50 

May 1.30 

June 1.20 

July 1.30 

August 1.45 

(Committee  Exhibit  No.  104.) 

This  station   received  about  225   dairies,   average  1,2000,000 
pounds  per  month.     The  average  monthly  price  for  the  year  was 

about  $1.48. 

6 


162 

F.  X.  Baumert  &  Company  is  a  large  concern  engaged  in  the 
manufacturing  of  special  brands  of  cheese  at  Antwerp,  Jefferson 
county,  2s.  Y.  The  industry  is  one  of  value  to  the  dairymen  of 
northern  Xew  York.  The  company  manufactures  many  brands 
of  cheese. 

EXHIBIT  No.  90 
SUMMER  MILK  CONTRACT  1916 

By  and  between  the  Patrons  Deliverying  Milk  at  the  Baumert  Factory  and 
F.  X.  Baumert  &  Co. 

From  and  after  the  1st  day  of  April,  1916,  and  until  the  30th  day  of  Sep- 
tember, 1916,  F.  X.  Baumert  &  Co.,  will  accept  and  receive  all  milk  delivered 
at  their  fa'ctory  in  the  village  of  Antwerp,  N.  Y.,  suitable  for  the  purpose  of 
manufacture  in  said  factory,  subject  to  the  conditions  following,  and  to  the 
rules  and  regulations  printed  on  the  back  hereof,  for  which  they  will  pay  at 
the  rates  and  prices  in  the  manner  following,  to  wit: 

For  all  milk  so  delivered  and  accepted  at  said  factory  during  the  month  of: 

April $1.40  for  all  milk  testing  3.4  per  cent,  butter  fat 

May 1.40  for  all  milk  testing  3.4  per  cent,  butter  fat 

June 1.40  for  all  milk  testing  3.4  per  cent,  butter  fat 

July 1.40  for  all  milk  testing  3.4  per  cent,  butter  fat 

August 1.50  for  all  milk  testing  3.4  per  cent,  butter  fat 

Sept 1.60  for  all  milk  testing  3.6  per  cent,  butter  fat 

A  deduction  of  3  cents  per  hundred  pounds  will  be  made  for  each  one-tenth 
of  one  percent,  of  all  milk,  delivered  and  accepted  during  each  month,  testing 
below  the  butter  fat  standard  fixed  in  the  monthly  schedule  of  prices  mentioned 
above. 

An  increase  of  three  cents  per  100  pounds  will  be  made  for  each  one-tenth 
of  one  per  cent,  of  all  milk,  delivered  and  accepted  during  each  month,  testing 
above  the  butter  fat  standard  fixed  in  the  monthly  schedule  of  prices  men- 
tioned above. 

Payments  for  all  milk  delivered  and  accepted  under  this  contract  shall  be 
made  monthly,  on  the  15th  day  of  the  month,  following  the  month  of  delivery 
excepting  when  the  loth  day  of  either  of  said  months  shall  fall  on  Sunday, 
or  a  legal  holiday,  in  which  case  payment  shall  be  made  on  the  day  following. 

In  case  of  the  destruction  of,  or  injury  to  the  buildings  or  the  machinery  or 
apparatus  therein,  by  fire,  accident  or  otherwise,  or  if  for  any  other  cause,  the 
manufacture  of  butter  or  cheese  (therein  is  interrupted  or  suspended,  said 
F.  X.  Baumert  &  Co.  shall  not  be  required  to  receive  or  accept  or  pay  for  any 
milk  for  such  reasonable  time  as  may  be  necessary  to  enable  them  to  provide 
or  prepare  a  suitable  place  or  places  for  such  purpose. 

The  delivery  of  milk  under  these  propositions  and  agreement  at  any  time 
from  and  after  the  first  day  of  April,  1916,  shall  be  deemed  an  acceptance 
of  said  propositions  and  agreement  in  their  entirety,  and  such  propositions 
and  agreement  shall  bind  any  person  so  delivering  to  deliver  all  the  milk  from 
his  or  her  dairy  until  the  termination  of  the  term  of  six  months  as  herein 
stipulated. 

Dated,  Antwerp,  N.  Y.,  March  25,  1916. 


163 

Rules  ond  Regulations 

Xo.  1.  All  milk  delivered  must  conform  to  the  conditions  required  by  the 
laws  of  the  State  of  Xew  York. 

No.  2.  All  milk  must  be  thoroughly  aerated  and  cooled  with  ice  water  or 
running  spring  water  .by  the  use  of  the  Champion  or  Perfection  aerator. 

No.  3.  All  milk  must  be  cooled  to  70  degrees  Fahrenheit  during  milking  or 
immediately  thereafter. 

No.  4.  Great  care  must  be  taken  to  aerate  the  milk  in  a  place  where  the  air 
is  fresh  and  untainted  and  all  milk  must  be  properly  strained  through  a  cloth 
strainer.  The  cloth  strainer  must  be  kept  scrupulously  clean  and  must  smell 
sweet.  All  cloth  strainers,  pails,  dippers,  cans  and  other  utensils  should  be 
rinsed  first  with  lukewarm  water,  and  then  with  boiling  water,  but  after 
scalding  no  utensils  should  be  wiped  with  a  dirty  rag. 

No.  5.  All  milking  must  be  done  in  a  manner  as  cleanly  as  possible,  and 
great  care  taken  to  prevent  any  manure,  dirt  or  other  impurities,  falling  into 
the  pail  Avhile  milking,  and  after  milking.  Each  pail  of  milk  must  as  soon  as 
drawn  from  the  cow,  be  taken  from  the  cow  barn  and  placed  in  the  aerator. 

No.  6.  Due  care  must  be  taken  to  prevent  rain  water  from  entering  and 
mixing  with  the  milk.  A  milk  shed  must  be  provided,  to  shelter  all  aerators 
and  milk  cans  from  the  rain.  All  milk  sheds  or  milk  houses  must  be  screened 
to  prevent  fowls,  cats,  or  other  animals  from  coming  in  contact  with  the  milk. 

No.  7.  All  milk  must  be  of  standard  quality  and  must  be  delivered  at  a 
seasonable  hour  in  the  morning.  The  night  and  morning's  milk  must  be  kept 
separate  and  the  night's  milk  must  be  unloaded  first. 

No.  8.  All  milk  must  be  hauled  an  a  spring  wagon,  but  no  wagon  must 
be  used  in  hauling  milk  that  is  used  for  hauling  manure  or  other  refuse. 

No.  9.  All  cans  that  are  used  for  the  delivery  of  milk  shall  be  in  good 
condition  and  free  from  rust  and  be  thoroughly  cleansed  as  soon  as  possible 
after  delivery  of  milk  at  the  factory. 

No.  10.  The  suggestions  of  the  Inspector  in  regard  to  the  manner  and  place 
of  keeping  milk  must  be  followed. 

No.  11.  All  stables  in  which  cows  are  kept  or  milk,  must  be  ventilated  and 
kept  as  clean  as  practicable,  but  no  litter  should  be  disturbed  immediately 
before  or  during  milking. 

No.  12:  The  cows  of  the  dairy  should  not  be  permitted  to  drink  stagnant 
water,  nor  shall  they  be  fed  any  turnips,  potatoes  or  other  objectionable  food, 
tending  to  impart  a  disagreeable  flavor  to  the  milk,  or  otherwise  impair  its 
quality. 

No.  13.  No  cows  should  be  fed  any  kind  of  feed  immediately  before  or 
during  milking — in  a  word,  no  dust  or  other  kind  of  breeding  germs  should  be 
set  in  motion  immediately  before  or  during  milking. 

N.  B. — All  cloth  strainers  for  straining  milk  will  be  cheerfully  furnished 
on  application  at  the  factory  whenever  required. 

The  winter  milk  contract  of  1915  and  1916  was  the  same  in 
form,  except  as  to  prices,  which  were  as  follows : 


164 


Price  Test 

October $1  70  3.6 

November 1  95  3.6 

December 1  95  3.6 

January 1  90  3.6 

February 1  70  3.5 

March  .'  1  60  3.4 


The  summer  milk  contract  of  1915  of  this  company  was  sub- 
stantially the  same,  except  for  prices,  which  were  as  follows: 

Price  Test 

April $1  30  3.4 

May 1  20  3.4 

June 1  20  3.4 

July 1  25  3.4 

August 1  30  3.4 

September 1  50 

The  Committee  obtained  statements  made  by  the  Beake's  Dairy 
Company  to  a  patron  of  the  Beake's  station  at  Franklin,  Delaware 
county,  covering  the  period  July  1,  1915,  to  June  30,  1916.  They 
are  marked  as  Exhibit  77  and  show  the  following  prices  paid  at 
that  point. 

1915 

Price  per 

cwt.  Test 

July $1  33  3.9 

August 146  3.8 

September 161  4.0 

October 1  96  4.2 

November 1  88  3.6 

December 1  94  3.8 


•  1916 

January $1  84  3.8 

February 1  82  3.6 

March 1  68  3.6 

April 1  43  3.4 

May          1  30  3.8 

June 1  14 

The  1916  contract  of  Sheffield  Farms,  iSlawson-Decker  Com- 
pany, at  Kichmondville,  1ST.  Y.,  gave  the  following  prices: 

April $1  60         Advanced  in  check  to        $1  70 

May. 1  30         Advanced  in  check  to  1  40 

June  .'  .' .'  .".* 1  30        Advanced  in  check  to  1  40 

July.   .  . 1  50 

August 1  65 

September 1  70 


165 

The  contract  for  September,  1915,  of  the  Slawson-Decker  Com- 
pany at  Richmondville,  carried  the  following  prices: 

October. $2  05 

November 2  10 

December 2  10 

January 2  05 

February 1  95 

March.  ".  1  90 


The  prices  paid  at  West  Danby  shipping  station  of  E.  H. 
Stevens  Company  for  grade  B  milk  from  January  1,  1915,  to 
July,  1916,  as  testified  to  before  the  Committee,  were  as  follows: 


January    . 

1915 
Price  per  can  of  40  quarts 
.$1  55 

February 

1  45 

March  

1  35 

April  

.      .  .              .            .  .        .      1  10 

Mav.  .  . 

1  00 

June          • 

1  00 

July.  . 

1   10 

August.  . 

1  20 

September 

1  35 

October 

1  50 

November  

1  70 

December  

1  70 

1916 

January $1  60 

February 1  60 

March 1  60 

April 1  50 

May 1  30 

June.  .  1  10 


NOTE. — These  are  for  40  quart  cans  of  milk  which  are  expected  to  average 
85  pounds  of  milk  per  can,  and  must  be  distinguished  from  the  prices  per 
hundred  weight. 

The  Clover-Dale  Farms  Company  of  the  city  of  Binghamton  in 
April,  1915,  issued  the  following  contract: 

EXHIBIT  NO.  25 

CLOVER-DALE  FARMS   COMPANY  CONTRACT 

Each  of  the  undersigned,  signing  for  himself  only,  agree  to  sell  and  deliver 
in  good  condition  to  the  Clover-Dale  Farms  Company  and  assigns,  at  its 
creamery  building  in  the  city  of  Binghamton,  as  early  in  the  morning  as 
8  o'clock  in  summer  and  9  o'clock  in  winter,  once  daily,  transporting  the  same 
by  spring  wagon,  having  the  cans  covered  with  canvass,  all  the  milk  pro- 
duced by  this  individual  dairy  from  April  1,  1915,  to  April  1,  1916,  which 


166 

milk  shall  be  pure,  sweet,  clean,  free  from  odor,  not  having  been  frozen,  of 
a  temperature  not  exceeding  60  degrees  F.  when  delivered  at  such  creamery 
and  shall  comply  with  the  requirements  hereinafter  contained,  and  shall 
average  for  the  year  at  least  4  per  cent  of  butter  fat. 

Each  of  the  parties  hereto  agrees  not  to  mix  from  night's  and  morning's 
milkings;  to  carefully  strain  the  milk  through  fine  wire  strainers,  having  at 
least  100  meshes  to  the  inch;  to  keep  pails  and  strainers  clean,  and  to 
thoroughly  wash  the  same  in  lukewarm  water  and  thereafter  scald  the  same 
night  and  morning;  to  keep  the  cow  stable  clean,  amply  lighted  and  ven- 
tilated, removing  all  manure  therefrom  daily;  and  to  use  no  foul  material 
for  bedding;  to  keep  the  cows  clean;  to  provide  a  milk  house  in  which  to 
cool  and  store  all  milk  and  keep  same  in  a  clean  and  sanitary  condition  at 
all  times;  to  reduce  all  milk  to  a  temperature  of  55  degress  F.  within 
three-quarters  of  an  hour  after  milking,  and  to  maintain  such  temperature, 
by  placing  the  cans  in  fresh  water  at  that  or  a  lower  temperature,  using  all 
the  ice  which  may  be  necessary  for  that  purpose,  until  taken  from  the  water 
for  delivery  to  the  Company;  to  allow  his  cattle  no  food  which  is  not  good 
and  wholesome,  nor  any  water  which  is  not  fresh  and  pure;  to  deliver  no 
milk  from  a  cow  not  in  perfect  health,  or  40  days  before  or  6  days  after 
coming  in;  to  at  all  times  allow  the  veterinary  and  other  representatives  of 
the  Clover-Dale  Farms  Company  to  inspect  his  stables,  cows,  food  and  water 
supply;  to  promptly  report  to  the  company  any  contagious  disease  which  may 
exist  in  his  family  or  on  his  farm,  and  to  observe  all  laws,  regulations  and 
ordinances  of  the  city  of  Binghamton  and  State  of  New  York  relative  to 
cattle  and  milk,  to  which  laws,  regulations  and  ordinances  any  obligations 
of  the  Clover-Dale  Farms  Company  to  receive  the  milk  shall  at  all  times 
be  subject. 

The  Clover-Dale  Farms  Company  agrees  to  buy  and  pay  for  such  milk  so 
delivered,  so  long  during  the  year  as  the  producer  continues  to  observe  and 
perform  all  the  foregoing  provisions  to  be  observed  and  performed  by  him, 
and  such  laws,  regulations  or  ordinances  do  not  forbid  the  receipt  of  such 
milk,  the  following  prices  per  hundred  pounds  for  grade  C  milk  as  graded 
by  New  York  State  Board  of  Health  score  card: 

April    $1  50  August    $1  55    December     $2  05 

May   1  20  September     1  vSO  January    1  95 

June     1   10  October    1  95   February 1  80 

July     1  30  November    2  05  March    * 1   75 


payable  on  the  10th  day  of  each  month  for  the  milk  delivered  during  the  pre 
ceding  month,  and  also  agrees  free  of  charge  to  wash  and  steam  the  cans 
at  the  creamery. 

The  Company  agrees  to  pay  the  farmer  for  all  his  milk  furnished  during 
such  time  as  his  scoring  shall  stand  grade  B  as  scored  by  New  York  State 
Board  of  Health  score  card,  the  additional  sum  of  10  cents  per  100  pounds. 

Also  an  additional  10  cents  per  100  pounds  for  all  milk  having  an  average 
butter  fat  test  of  4.5  per  cent  butter  fat. 

The  Company  agrees  to  whitewash  the  cow  stables  of  the  farmer  free  of 
expense  to  him,  upon  the  condition  that  he  shall  have  his  stable  in  such 
condition  of  cleanliness  as  the  company  may  require  at  such  times  as  the  Com- 


167 

pany  shall  fix  for  whitewashing  on  ten  days'  notice  to  the  farmer;  and  upon 
the  further  condition  that  the  farmer  shall  furnish  a  suitable  man  to  work 
the  spray  pump  during  the  process  of  applying  the  whitewash. 

CLOVER-DALE  FARMS  CO. 

Per  JOHNSON, 

The  Chemung  Dairy  Products  Company  at  Big  Flats,  in  the 
spring  of  1915,  issued  the  following  contract: 

To  our  Patrons: 

Owing  to  the  general  depression  in  the  milk  market  it  is  necessary  for  us 
to  cut  the  prices  paid  last  year  for  milk.  The  depression  affects  all  milk 
products.  Our  prices  averaged  a  little  better  than  10  cents  per  hundred 
pounds  above  Borden's  prices  for  this  zone.  They  are  as  follows: 

Price  per  100  Ibs. 

April $1  40 

May 1  27 

June 1  05 

July 1  27 

August  .  .  . 1  51 

September 1  63 

October 1  63 

November 1  76 

December 1  86 

1916     January 1  76 

February 171 

March 1  66 

Ten  cents  per  hundred  pounds  is  added  for  milk  testing  4  per  cent  butter 
fat,  or  better. 

CHEMUNG  DAIRY  PRODUCTS  CO. 

(Committee  Exhibit  No.    19.) 
COMMITTEE  EXHIBIT  17 

HORSEHEADS    CREAMERY    COMPANY 

Producers  and  Shippers  of  High  Grade  Cream  Contents 

and  Evaporated  Milk;  Manufacturers  of 

Fancy  Butter 

HORSEHEADS,  N.  Y.,  November  20,  1913. 

We  beg  to  submit  the  following  prices  per  100  pounds  (47  quarts  to  the  100 
Ibs.)  for  milk  for  the  winter  season  1913-1914,  delivered  at  our  plant,  viz: 

December $2  00 

January 1  90 

February 1  80 

March 1  65 

Or  you  can  take  the  test  plan,  same  as  usual. 

Where  the  butter  basis  is  taken,  the  price  of  milk  will  remain  the  same  as 
in  the  past.  Where  the  stated  price  is  taken  the  price  for  milk  will  be  10 
cents  per  100  pounds.  You  should  advise  us  of  your  choice  of  the  above  plans 
on  or  before  December  1,  1913. 


168 

November  20,  1914,  the  Horseheads  Creamery  Company  issued 
the  same  notice  of  contract,  with  the  exception  of  prices  which  were 
as  follows  (Exhibit 


December  .......................................   $1  85 

January  ..........................  ...............     1  75 

February  ........................................      1  65 

March  ...........................................      1  55 

Xovember  20,  1915,  the  company  issued  the  same  notice  or  con- 
tract, with  the  exception  of  prices. 

For  milk  for  the  winter  season,  1015-16,  delivered  at  our  plant,  viz.: 

Month. 

December  ........................................  $1  90 

January  ........................................  1  80 

February  ........................................  1  70 

March  ..........................................  1  60 

On  March  25,  1916,  the  Horseheads  Creamery  Company  issued 
the  following  notice  or  contract.  (Exhibit  14)  : 

EXHIBIT  NO.  14 

HORSEHEADS,  X.  Y.,  March  25,  1916. 
To  our  Patrons: 

We  beg  to  submit  the  following  prices  per  100  Ibs.  (47  quarts  to  the  100 
Ibs.)  for  milk  for  the  summer  season  1916,  delivered  at  our  plant,  viz.:  For 
the  month  of  April,  $1.35;  May,  $1.10;  June,  $1.05;  July,  $1.25;  August, 
$1.40;  September,  $1.50;  October.  $1.65;  November,  $1.75;  and  also  an  addi- 
tional premium  of  10  cents  per  100  Ibs.  for  all  milk  testing  4  per  cent  butter 
fat  or  better.  Or  you  can  take  the  butter  basis  on  the  test  plan  as  usual. 

Prices  for  milk  hauling  and  skim  milk  will  remain  the  same  as  in  the  past. 
In  addition  we  wish  to  state  that  we  do  not  require  any  barn  or  dairy  in- 
spection. No  aerated  or  ice  cooled  milk  —  just  plain,  unadulterated,  clean 
milk. 

You  should  advise  us  of  your  choice  of  the  above  plans  on  or  before  April 
10th,  1916. 

HORSEHEADS  CREAMERY  CO. 

On  May  1,  1916,  the  Levy  Dairy  Company  issued  the  following 
statement  : 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK,  May  1,  1916. 
Mr.  C.  F.  WOLF,  Bartlett,  Y.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir.  —  Commencing  May  1.  1016.  we  will  pay  for  all  milk  delivered 
to  the  above  station  as  follows  until  further  notice:  $1.24  per  cwt. 

Yours  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 

By  W.  A.  CAMPBELL. 


169 

This  was  promptly  followed  by  another  letter : 

NEW  YORK,  May  I,  1916. 
Mr.  C.  F.  WOLF,  Bartlett,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. — You  may  inform  the  patrons  at  your  station  that  we  will  meet 
the  ten  cent  advance  in  Bordeu's  prices.  Unfortunately,  the  checks  for  the 
first  half  of  April  are  already  made  out,  so  that  we  will  put  the  extra  ten 
cents  for  the  first  half  on  the  checks  for  the  second  half. 

Yours  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 

June  1st,  the  following  was  issued : 

NEW  YORK,  June  1,  1916. 
Mr.  C.  F.  WOLF,  Bartlett,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Commencing  June  1,  1916,  we  will  pay  for  all  milk  delivered 
to  the  above  station  as  follows  until  further  ordered,  "  Borden's  3.6  prices." 

Yours  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY 

MILK  AND  CREAM 

NEW  YORK,  July  1,  1916. 
Mr.  JAMES  J.  SEALS,  Bartlett,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Commencing  July  1,  1916,  we  will  pay  for  all  milk  delivered  to 
the  above  station  as  follows  until  further  notice:  $1.34  per  cwt. 

Yours  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 

This  was  followed  by  a  letter  of  July  llth: 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY 

MILK  AND  CREAM 
19th  Street  and  Avenue  B 

NEW  YORK  CITY,  July  11,  1916. 
Mr.  J.  J.  SEALS,  Bartlett,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  With  reference  to  10  cent  increase  for  the  month  of  June,  the 
writer  cannot  say  what  action  Mr.  Levy  will  take  in  this  matter  as  he  is  out 
of  town  at  present,  but  I  believe  he  will  meet  Borden's  increase  for  this  month. 
Kindly  ask  the  patrons  to  defer  this  matter  until  the  checks  for  the  second 
half  arrive  at  the  station. 

Yours  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 

This  was  followed  by  a  letter  of  July  31,  1916 : 
LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY 

MILK  AND  CREAM 

NEW  YORK,  July  31,  1916. 
JAMES  J.  SEALS,  Barilett,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Commencing  August  1,  1916,  we  will  pay  for  all  milk  delivered 
to  the  above  station  as  follows  until  further  notice:  $1.50  per  cwt. 

Yours  very  truly, 

LEVY  DAIRY  COMPANY. 


iro 

The  form  of  contract  used  by  the  Geneva  Milk  Company  for 
the  purchase  of  milk  in  the  spring  of  1916  is  as  follows: 

MEMORANDUM  OF  AGREEMENT  INTO,  this  day  of  1916,  be- 

tween of  Geneva,  N.  Y.,  party  of  the  first 

part,  hereinafter  termed  the  Producer,  and  the  GENEVA  MILK  COMPANY, 
party  of  the  second  part,  hereinafter  known  as  the  Company. 

WITNESSETH:  The  Producer  for  himself  and  not  for  others,  for  and  in 
consideration  of  the  sum  of  ONE  DOLLAR,  to  in  hand  paid,  the  re- 

ceipt of  which  is  hereby  acknowledged,  agrees  to  furnish  the  Company  what 

milk  may  produce  from cows,  from  the  first  day  of 

April,  1917;  delivery  of  said  milk  to  be  made  to  the  Company,  at  its  place 
of  business,  not  later  than  A.  M.  each  day  during  April,  May,  June, 

July,  August  and  September  and  not  later  than  A.  M.  each  day  dur- 

ing the  remainder  of  the  year  above  mentioned. 

IT  IS  AGREED,  that  the  milk  supplied  by  the  Producer  shall  be  reasonably 
free  from  sediment;  without  taint,  sweet,  unadulterated  and  contain  at  least 
3.8  per  cent,  butter  fat,  except  as  hereinafter  provided;  such  butter  content 
to  be  determined  by  Babcock  Test  of  samples  taken  by  the  Company,  dupli- 
cates of  which  samples  will  be  retained  for  the  Producer  at  his  request. 

Should  milk,  produced  under  this  Contract,  test  under  3  8/10  per  cent, 
in  butter  fat,  the  Producer  agrees  to  allow  a  deduction  by  the  Company  of 
1/10  of  a  cent  per  quart  for  each  1/10  of  a  point  that  the  milk  tests  under 
3  8/10  per  cent.  No  deductions  are  to  be  made,  however,  on  a  basis  of  less 
than  four  tests  on  four  different  days  in  one  month. 

The  Producer  agrees  to  give  the  Company  the  right  to  inspect  his  premises 
for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  under  what  conditions  above  milk  is  produced. 

The  Producer  further  agrees  to  notify  the  Company  at  once  in  the  event  of 
any  illness  from  any  infectious  or  contagious  disease  of  any  of  the  members 
of  his  household,  or  that  of  his1  help,  during  the  life  of  this  Contract.  In  the 
event  of  any  of  said  milk  being  condemned  by  the  Geneva  City  Board  of 
Health,  the  Company  shall  at  once  be  relieved  from  obligation  to  take  said 
milk  under  this  contract  until  said  supply  is  approved  by  the  said  Board 
of  Health;  it  being  agreed  that  the  milk  is  to  be  produced  according  to  the 
requirements  of  the  Geneva  Board  of  Health. 

IT  IS  UNDERSTOOD  AND  AGREED,  that  in  the  event  of  the  producer  pur- 
chasing skim  milk  from  the  Company  at  any  time,  that  said  skim  milk  is 
sold  without  any  implied  warranty  as  to  being  free  from  germs  of  any  sort 
and  the  producer  assumes  all  risk. 

IT  IS  MUTUALLY  AGREED  AND  UNDERSTOOD,  that  should  any  in- 
terruption occur  in  the  conduct  of  the  Company's  business,  due  to  conditions 
beyond  its  control,  it  shall  at  once  notify  the  Producer  and  shall  be  released 
from  any  obligation  to  take  milk  from  its  producer  during  said  interruption. 

The  Company  agrees  to  pay  on  the  6th  of  the  succeeding  month  for  milk 
delivered  under  this  contract  at  the  following  prices  per  quart  for  the  differ- 
ent months: 


in 

Good      Medium  Poor 

April..                                     $.036  $.031  $.025 

May.. .                                 .036  .031  .025 

June...  .036  .031  .025 

July .039  .033  .03 

August .042  .036  .03 

September .047  .041  .035 

October .047  .041  .035 

November .047  .041  .035 

December .046  .04  .035 

January .04  .035  .03 

February .04  .034  .03 

March .036  .032  .025 

IT  IS  MUTUALLY  UNDERSTOOD  AND  AGREED,  that  the  grade  of  milk 
delivered  under  this  contract  shall  be  determined  by  bacteriological  tests  as 
made  by  representatives  of  the  New  York  State  Experiment  Station.  It 
being  understood  that  the  average  rating  given  monthly  by  the  Experiment 
'Station  shall  determine  the  price  to  be  paid  for  milk  delivered  for  the  month 
per  the  above  schedule. 

In  Witness  Whereof,  the  parties  hereto  have  set  their  hands  and  seals,  the 
day  and  vear  first  above  written. 

(L.  S.) 

GENEVA  MILK  COMPANY, 
By 

The  Brighton  Place  Daily  Company,  a  prosperous  Rochester 
concern,  in  the  spring  of  1916  issued  and  required  the  following 
contracts : 

MILK  CONTRACT 
BRIGHTON  PLACE  DAIRY  COMPANY 

MEMORANDUM  OF  AGREEMENT  entered  into  this day  of , 

1916,  between  the  Brighton  Place  Dairy  Company,  of  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  party 

of  the  first  part  and of 

N.  Y.,  party  of  the  second  part. 

WITNESSETH:  the  party  of  the  second  part  for and  not 

for  others,  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of  one  dollar  the  receipt 
of  which  is  hereby  acknowledged  and  amounts  hereinafter  named,  to  be  paid 
by  the  party  of  the  first  part,  hereby  agrees  to  sell  and  deliver,  F.  0.  B. 
Brighton  Station,  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  the  number  of  pounds  estimated  (as 

specified  below)  of  pure,  sweet  unadulterated  milk  produced  from 

individual  dairy  or  dairies. 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  all  milk  shall  be  delivered  at  time 
designated  by  the  party  of  the  first  part. 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  the  milk  sold  by  the  party  of  the 
second  part  shall  be  subject  to  the  rules,  regulations  and  approval  of  the 
Health  Bureau  of  the  City  of  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  if  any  interruption  in  the  conduct 
of  the  business,  due  to  conditions  beyond  control  of  the  party  of  the  first  part, 
shall  arise  they  shall  immediately  notify  the  party  of  the  second  part,  and 


1T2 

shall  thereafter  be  under  no  obligations  to  receive  milk  from  the  party  of  the 
second  part  during  the  said  period  of  interruption. 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  should  any  member  of  the  family 
or  servant  thereof,  of  the  party  of  the  second  part  be  taken  sick  with  any 

infectious  disease will  immediately  notify  the  party  of  the 

first  part  and  discontinue  delivering  milk  during  said  period  of  illness. 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  the  party  of  the  first  part  will 
pay  an  additional  3c  per  cwt.  for  each  point  above  3.8  per  cent,  butter  fat, 
and  deduct  3c  per  cwt.  for  each  point  below  3.8  per  cent,  butter  fat  from 
April  1st  to  Oct.  1st,  1916,  and  an  additional  3c  per  cwt.  for  each  point  above 
4  per  cent,  butter  fat  and  deduct  3c  per  cwt.  for  each  point  below  4  per  cent, 
butter  fat  from  Oct.  1st,  1916  to  April  1st,  1917. 

No  VERBAL  AGREEMENT  WILL  BE  RECOGNIZED 

It  is  further  agreed  and  understood  that  the  party  of  the  first  part  is  to 
pay  on  the  twentieth  day  of  each  month,  following  delivery. 

Number  of  cows 

Per  cwfc. 

Daily  average,  April,          1916,  pounds,  at $1  80 

Daily  average,  May,  1916.  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  June,  1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  July,  1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  August,       1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  September,  1916,  pounds,  at 2  00 

Daily  average,  October,      1916  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  November,  1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  December,  1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  January,     1917,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  February,   1917,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  March,        1917,  pounds,  at 

In  Witness  Whereof,  the  parties  hereunto  interchangeably  set  their  hands, 

the  dav  and  vear  first  above  written. 

BRIGHTON  PLACE  DAIRY  CO. 

By (L.  S.) 

(L.  S.) 

Tliis  company  lias  a  station  at  Metealfe,  ^N".  Y.,  in  the  Rochester 
territory,  where  it  issued  the  same  contract.  The  prices  for  Met-, 
calfe  deliveries  were  as  follows: 

Number  of  cows 

Per  cwt. 

Daily  average,  April,  1916,          pounds,  at $1  60 

Daily  average.  May,  1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  June,  1916,  pounds,  at 1  20 

Daily  average,  July,  1916,          pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  August,       1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  September,  1916,          pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  October,      1916,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  November,  1916,  pounds,  at 2  00 

Daily  average,  December,  1916,  pounds,  at 2  00 

Daily  average,  January,      1917,  pounds,  at 

Daily  average,  February,    1917,  pounds,  at 1  65 

Daily  average.  March,         19-17,  pounds,  at 1  65 


173 

CONTRACT  BETWEEN  EGBERT  HANNA,  ESQ.,  OF  GENESEO,  N.  Y.,  AND 
THE  BIG  ELM  DAIRY  OF  ROCHESTER,  N.  Y. 

This  agreement  made  and  entered  into  this  22nd  day  of  February,  1916,  by 
and  between  Robert  Hanna  of  Geneseo,  N.  Y.,  and  the  Big  Elm  Dairy  Com- 
pany of  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  WITNESSETH: 

That  said  Robert  Hanna  hereby  agrees  to  furnish  and  deliver  daily,  F.  0.  B. 
Erie  Railroad,  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  700  pounds,  pure,  sweet,  aerated  inilk,  from 
April  1,  1916,  to  April  1,  1917.  The  night  milk  to  be  properly  cooled  to  40 
degrees  Fahrenheit  and  all  morning  milk  to  be  cooled  to  45  degrees  Fahren- 
heit, and  plainly  marked  or  tagged  as  such  morning  milk.  The  milk  to  be 
strained  through  at  least  four  thicknesses  of  clean  cheesecloth,  which  cloths 
are  to  be  thoroughly  cleaned  with  hot  water  every  day.  The  barnyard, 
stables,  milk  room,  all  appurtenances  and  milk  itself  are  all  to  be  cared  for 
in  a  manner  wich  will  be  in  every  way  satisfactory  to  the  Board  of  Health 
of  the  city  of  Rochester  and  meet  with  the  regulations  thereof  and  of  said 
city.  Said  Big  Elm  Dairy  Company  hereby  agrees-  to  pay  the  said  Robert 
Hanna  for  milk  so  delivered  $1.86  per  cwt.  from  April  1,  1916,  to  April  1, 
1917.  The  milk  shipped  in  excess  of  the  quantity  herein  specified,  or  so-called 

surplus  milk  to  be  paid  for  at  the  rate  of cents  per  hundred  weight. 

Payments  to  be  made  monthly.  All  cans  used  in  such  delivery  must  on  their 
return  to  the  producer  named  therein  be  thoroughly  cleaned,  inverted  and 
elevated  from  the  ground  or  floor  level  in  a  clean  place  and  rinsed  with  cold 
water  before  re-filling. 

Witneseeth  the  hand  and  seals  of  the  parties  hereto  the  day  and  year  first 
above  written. 

(Signed)  BIG  ELM  DAIRY  COMPANY, 

A.  E.  WOOD,  President 
(Signed)  ROBERT  HANNA. 

Mr.  Spiehler  of  the  Big  Elm  Dairy  Company,  testified : 

"  The  700  pounds  is  only  an  approximate  estimate  of  his  dairy  production 
daily.  We  take  all  he  produces.  We  have  an  understanding  to  that  effect. 
If  he  fell  below  700  pounds  we  would  write  him  a  courteous  letter  asking 
him  if  he  cannot  put  on  more  cows  to  live  up  to  his  contract.  They  usually 
co-operate  with  us.  If  they  are  obstinate  about  it,  we  make  other  arrange- 
ments to  get  milk  elsewhere.  Of  course  we  have  a  cause  of  action  against  the 
producer  but  we  never  have  pressed  anything  like  that.  These  dairies  are  not 
tuberculin  tested.  If  Mr.  Hanna  does  not  satisfy  the  Health  Board  of  the 
city  of  Rochester,  the  bureau  will  notify  him  not  to  ship  milk  until  his  condi- 
tions are  so  improved  that  it  comes  up  to  the  requirment.  The  $1.86  rate 
has  been  in  vogue  here  for  the  last  five  years,  roughly  speaking.  We  sell 
about  500  quarts  of  certified  milk  a*t  15  cents  a  quart.  Rochester  has  some- 
thing like  200  or  225  milk  dealers.  We  pasteurize  the  milk  at  our  plant  in 
the  city.  We  pay  the  same  price  as  Avon.  Of  course,  the  producer  pays  the 
freight.  This  is  about  one-eighth." 

In  1915  the  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company  issued 
contract  or  notice  as  follows,  at  one  of  its  stations  at  Franklin- 
ville,  N.  Y. : 


174: 

Schedule  of  Prices 

And  summary  of  Contract  of  Sheffield  Farms- Slawson-Decker  Co.  for  com- 
ing six  months,  1915. 

Prices  Per  Hundred  Pounds 

April $1.40         July $1.40 

May 1.25         Aug 1.40 

June 1.20         Sept 1.50 

First.  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  in  addition  to  stated  prices  3c  per 
point  per  hundred  pounds  for  butter  fat  from  4  to  4.5  per  cent.  The  first 
premium  of  3c  per  hundred  pounds  to  be  paid  for  4.1  per  cent,  milk,  and  the 
maximum  premium  of  15c  per  hundred  pounds  to  be  paid  for  milk  testing 
4.5  per  cent.  There  will  be  a  deduction  of  3c  per  hundred  pounds  for  each 
one-tenth  per  cent,  below  3.8  per  cent.,  the  first  deduction  to  be  made  for  milk 
testing  3.7  per  cent. 

Second.  The  above  tests  are  to  be  made  on  composite  samples  taken  daily 
and  tested  three  times  a  month.  The  average  of  these  three  tests  each 
month  to  be  the  basis  on  which  premiums  are  paid. 

Third.  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  each  month  for  all  milk  de- 
livered to  its  plants  at  a  temperature  of  50  or  below  each  and  every  day 
during  the  month  of  5c  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  months  of  April,  May, 
and  June  and  15c  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  months  of  July,  August,  and 
September. 

Fourth.  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  of  lOc  per  hundred  to  all  pro- 
ducers who  show  a  total  score  of  68  per  cent,  or  over.  This  total  score  must 
consist  of  at  least  43  per  cent,  on  methods  and  25  per  cent,  on  equipment. 

Fifth.    Skim  milk  will  be  sold  back  to  patrons  at  15c  per  can  of  40  quarts. 

Sixth.  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  second  parties  on  or  before  the 
15th  of  each  month  for  such  milk  so  delivered  the  preceding  month  and  pay 
NOT  LESS  than  the  above  prices  for  six  months. 

SHEFFIELD  FAEMS-SLAWSON-DECKER  CO. 

In  the  spring  of  1916  the  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Com- 
pany at  Franklinville,  K.  Y.,  issued  the  following  statement : 

SUMMARY  OF  CONTRACT  OF  SHEFFIELD  FARMS -SLAWSON-DECKER 

CO.  FOR  COMING  SIX  MONTHS,  1916. 

Prices  Per  Hundred  Pounds 

April $1 . 45         July $1 . 40 

May 1.30        August.. 1.50 

June 1 . 30        September 1 . 70 

First.  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  in  addition  to  stated  prices  3  cents  a 
point  per  hundred  pounds  for  butter  fat  from  3.8  to  4.5  per  cent.  There  will 
be  a  deduction  of  3  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  each  one-tenth  per  cent, 
below  3.8  per  cent. 

Second.  The  above  tests  are  to  be  made  on  composite  samples  taken  daily 
and  tested  three  times  a  month.  The  average  of  these  three  tests  each  month 
to  be  the  basis  on  which  the  premiums  are  paid. 


175 

Third.  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  each  month  for  all  milk  de- 
livered to  its  plants  at  a  temperature  of  50  or  below  each  and  every  day  dur- 
ing the  month  of  5  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  the  months  of  April,  May  and 
June,  and  15  cents  per  hundred  for  the  months  of  July,  August  and  Sep- 
tember. 

Fourth.  The  first  party  will  pay  a  premium  of  10  cents  per  hundred  pounds 
to  all  producers  who  show  a  total  score  of  68  per  cent,  or  over.  This  total 
scone  must  consist  of  at  least  43  per  cent,  on  methods  and  25  per  cent,  on 
equipment. 

Fifth.  The  first  party  will  sell  skim  milk  to  second  parties  at  15  cents 
per  can  of  40  quarts  but  reserve  the  right  during  the  months  of  August  and 
September  to  stop  making  skim  milk  for  sale,  so  that  they  may  ship  all  their 
milk  to  New  York. 

Sixth.  The  first  party  agrees  to  pay  to  second  parties  on  or  before  the 
15th  of  each  month  for  such  milk  so  delivered  the  preceding  month  and  pay 
not  less  than  the  above  prices  for  April.  The  prices  for  May,  June,  July  and 
August  and  September  will  be  announced  on  the  20th  day  of  the  preceding 
months. 

-SHEFFIELD  FARMS-SLAWSON-DECKER  CO. 

In  September,  1916,  the  Sheffield  Farms  Company  proposed  the 
following  contract  at  some  of  its  stations  for  the  winter  contract, 
1916—17.  So  far  as  this  Committee  knows,  this  contract  never 
went  into  effect  to  any  considerable  extent  as  it  was  superseded 
by  the  contracts  between  the  New  York  dealers  and  the  Dairy- 
men's League.  It  is  inserted  here  because  of  its  interest  upon  the 
subject  under  discussion: 

CHEESE  BASIS. 

MEMORANDUM  OF  AGREEMENT  made  this day  of   September, 

1916,  between  Sheffield  Farms- Slawson-Decker  Company,  a  corporation  organ- 
ized under  the  laws  of  New  York,  party  of  the  first  part,  hereinafter  called 

the  Company,  and  the  undersigned  producers  of  milk,  at ,  State  of 

,   severally,   as   parties  of  the   second  part,   hereinafter 

called  the  Producers. 

First.  The  Company  agrees  to  buy  from  the  Producers  and  the  Producers, 
each  for  himself  or  herself,  agrees  to  sell  to  the  Company,  all  the  good 
merchantable  cow's  milk  he  or  she  may  produce  from  October  1,  1916,  to 
April  1,  1917,  and  deliver  it  fresh,  clean,  sweet,  of  good  flavor,  satisfactory 
to  the  Company  and  to  the  Board  of  Health  of  the  city  of  New  York  and 
the  Agricultural  Department  of  the  State,  at  the  creamery  of  the  Company  at 
this  place,  at  such  time  and  in  such  manner  and  condition  as  the  Company 
may  prescribe. 

Second.  The  Company  agrees  to  pay  therefor  a  stated  price,  hereinafter  set 
forth  at  the  end  hereof,  and,  in  addition  thereto,  to  pay  as  a  premium  for 
butter  fat  the  sum  of  3c  per  hundred  pounds  for  each  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent, 
from  3.8  per  cent  to  4.5  per  cent,  inclusive.  The  stated  price  is,  however, 
also  subject  in  like  manner  to  a  deduction  of  3c  per  hundred  pounds  of  milk 


176 

for  all  milk  containing  less  than  3.8  per  cent,  of  butter  fat  for  each  one-tenth 
per  cent,  under  such  figure. 

Third.  The  test  AY  hereby  the  content  of  milk  is  ascertained  for  such  pur- 
pose is  to  be  made  on  composite  samples  taken  daily  and  tested  three  times 
a  month.  The  average  of  these  three  tests  each  month  to  be  the 
basis  on  which  such  premiums  or  deductions  are  ascertained.  Average  tests 
will  be  fixed  at  the  nearest  1/10  per  cent,  whether  above  or  below. 

Fourth.  The  Company  will  pay  additional  monthly  premium  for  barn  score 
as  follows:  lOc  per  hundred  pounds  to  all  milk  producers  who  show  a  score 
equal  to  the  barn  score  standard  now  in  force,  or  as  the  same  is  hereafter 
amended,  prescribed  by  the  Department  of  Health  of  the  city  of  Xe\v  York, 
and  which  standard  is  now  a  minimum  of  25  for  equipment  and  43  for 
methods,  as  such  standard  is  in  force  during  such  monthly  premium  period. 

Fifth.  The  stated  prices  and  premiums  named  herein  are  subject,  however, 
to  the  following:  If  in  any  month  or  months  the  Company  shall  fail  to  sell 
as  fluid  milk  all  milk  received  by  it  in  its  entire  business,  and  has  a  surplus 
of  milk  not  so  disposed  of  the  producer  shall  receive  for  a  portion  01  his  oi- 
lier milk  a  price  based  on  the  market  price  for  cheese  as  follows: 

'Shortly  after  the  end  of  each  month  a  statement  shall  be  posted  by  the 
Company  at  the  creamery,  showing  what  percentage  of  total  milk  received  in 
the  Company's  business  was  disposed  of  as  fluid  milk.  For  such  percentage 
of  the  milk  of  the  producer  he  shall  receive  the  stated  price  with  premiums 
or  deductions  as  herein  stated.  For  the  remainder  of  his  milk  for  such 
month  he  shall  receive  and  the  Company  will  pay  the  highest  average  quota- 
tion for  fresh  average  fancy  colored  cheese  in  the  New  York  city  market, 
as  published  in  the  Producers  Price  Current  for  the  month,  figured  on  the 
basis  of  100  pounds  of  milk  producing  10  pounds  of  cheese  and  less  one  cent 
(Ic)  per  pound  for  manufacture. 

All  payments  shall  be  made  on  the  15th  of  each  month  for  all  milk  de- 
livered in  the  preceding  calendar  month. 

Sixth.  It  is  mutually  agreed  between  the  parties  as  follows:  That  if  the 
Company  finds  itself  unable  to  operate  its  plant  or  prepare  milk  for  ship- 
ment to  New  York  by  fire,  accident,  strikes,  interruption  of  railroad  trans- 
portation, or  inability  to  secure  necessary  supplies,  it  shall  post  notice  of 
that  fact  at  the  creamery  and  shall  thereafter  not  be  bound  to  continue  the 
performance  of  this  agreement  while  such  conditions  continue.  It  shall  notify 
the  Producers  promptly  upon  the  termination  of  such  condition  or  conditions, 
and  thereupon  the  obligation  to  deliver  and  receive  milk  shall  re-commence.  If 
the  Producer  on  his  part  is  unable  to  make  deliveries  to  the  Company  because 
of  action  of  public  authorities,  he  or  she  shall  be  under  no  duty  to  supply 
milk  to  the  Company  on  and  after  giving  notice  to>  the .  Company  of  such 
action,  preventing  the  delivery  of  milk. 

Except  as  above  provided,  this  contract  calls  for  continuous  delivery  by  the 
Producers  and  continuous  acceptance  of  milk  by  the  Company  during  the  con- 
tract period.  The  Company  may  cancel  the  contract  in  case  adulterated, 
skimmed  or  contaminated  milk  is  offered  or  delivered  by  the  Producer  to  the* 
Company's  plant. 


.1 


177  ' 

STATED  PBICE 
Prices  given  below  are  per  hundred  pounds  of  liquid  milk: 

October 2.05 

November 2.05 

December 2.05 

January 2.00 

February 2.00 

March 1.90 

Per  cent  butterfat 3.         3.1      3.2      3.3      3.4      3.5      3.6      3.7 

October 1.81     1.84     1.87     1.90     1.93     1.96     1.99    2.02 

November 

December 

January 1.76     1.79     1.82     1.85     1.88     1.91     1.94     1.97 

February 

March..  1.66     1.69     1.72     1.75     1.78     1.81     1.84     1.87 


Per  cent  butterfat 3.8  3.9       4.         4.1       4.2      4.3      4.4      4.5 

October 2.05  2.08    2.11     2.14     2.17     2.20    2.23     2.26 

November 2 . 05  

December 2 . 05  

January 2.00  2.03     2.06    2.09    2.12     2.15     2.18    2.21 

February 2.00  

March..  1.90  1.93     1.96     1.99     2.02     2.05     2.08    2.11 


Example  Demonstrating   T^Yorking  of   Manufacturing   Clause  in  Contract 

Cheese  Basis 

Company  sold  90  per  cent,  of  its  total  milk  receipts  as  fluid  milk.  A 
patron's  total  production  for  the  month  was  10,000  pounds  milk.  He  would 
be  paid  as  follows:  For  90  per  cent  of  his  milk,  or  9,000  pounds,  he  would 
receive  stated  price  with  premium  or  deduction  as  stated  in  contract.  For 
ten  per  cent,  of  his  milk,  or  the  balance  of  1,000  pounds,  he  would  receive  a 
price  per  hundred  pounds  based  on  cheese  manufacturing  price,  as  outlined  in 
contract. 

To  further  demonstrate  this  we  will  assume  the  highest  average  quotation 
for  Fresh  Average  Fancy  Colored  Cheese  was  18  %  rents  per  pound.  De- 
ducting the  one  per  cent,  per  pound  for  manufacturing  we  would  have  11% 
cents  per  pound  and  as>  stated  in  contract  there  would  be  10  pounds  allowed 
for  each  one  hundred  pounds  milk,  therefore,  the.  price  paid  would  be  $1.75 
per  one  hundred  pounds  for  this  balance  of  1,000  pounds  of  milk. 

Or  expressed  in  figures  only: 

9,000  pounds  at  contract  price  or  $2,00 $180.00 

1,000  pounds  at  cheese  manufacturing  price  or  $1.75.  .        17.50 

Total  .  $197.50 


The  Merrell-Soule  Company  are  extensive  manufacturers  of 
milk  powder  by  the  spray  process.  They  have  large  plants  in  the 
western  part  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  manufacture  large 
quantities  of  the  product.  September  26,  1916,  this  company 
issued  the  following  notice  or  contract : 


178 

EXHIBIT  NO.  186 

September  26,  1916. 
To  Our  Patrons: 

On  and  after  October  1st,  1916,  and  until  further  notice,  the  price  of  milk 
will  be  $2.00  per  cwt.  delivered  at  our  plant  at  Little  Valley,  or  $1.90  per  cwt. 
when  hauled  by  our  teams. 

These  prices  are  based  on  milk  testing  4  per  cent,  butter  fat,  with  an  ad- 
dition of  3  cents  for  each  one-tenth  per  cent,  above  4  per  cent.,  and  a  deduc- 
tion of  3  cents  for  each  one -tenth  per  cent,  below  4  per  cent. 

The  above  price  will  be  paid  providing  conditions  are  maintained  which  will 
score  68  points  or  more,  25  on  equipment  and  43  on  methods,  according  to  the 
New  York  City  Department  of  Health  -Score  Card. 

On  all  dairies  which  score  less  than  25  on  equipment  and  43  on  methods, 
there  will  be  a  deduction  of  10  cents  per  cwt. 

All  milk  must  be  cooled  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  received  at  our  plant 
at  60  degrees  F.,  or  lower. 

MERRELL-SOULE  CO. 

Little  Valley,  N.  Y. 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Company  issued  the  following  con- 
tract at  its  station  at  Ellicottsville,  JS".  Y.,  in  September,  1916: 

EXHIBIT  NO.  185 
To  Patrons: 

The  following  prices  for  the  different  B.  F.  tests  will  be  paid  per  100 
pounds  of  milk  delivered  during  the  month  of  October,  1916,  at  Ellicottville, 

N.  Y.,  factory. 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY. 


3.0 

3.1 

3 

.2 

3.3 

3.4 

3 

.5 

3.6 

3.7 

1.66 

1.69 

1 

.72 

1.75 

1.78 

1 

.81 

1.84 

1.87 

3.8 

3 

9 

4.0 

4 

.1 

4.2 

4.3 

4.4 

4 

5  and  over 

1.90 

1 

.93 

1.96 

1 

.99 

2.02 

2.05 

2.08 

2 

11 

The  above  prices  will  be  paid  to  dairymen  where  they  maintain,  during  this 
contract,  conditions  scoring  not  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equip- 
ment and  forty-three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  according  to  the  New  York 
Department  of  Health  Score  Card  as  scored  by  the  Company's  representatives. 
Dairymen  scoring  less  thun  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  on  equipment  and 
forty-three  (43)  per  cent,  on  methods,  will  receive  ten  cents  (lOc)  per  100 
pounds  less  than  the  above  schedule. 

The  Orange  County  Milk  Association  in  the  spring  of  1916 
issued  the  following  notice  or  contract  at  its  plant  in  Goshen, 

K  Y.: 


179 

ORANGE  COUNTY  MILK  ASSOCIATION. 

Beginning  April  1st,  we  will  pay  for  milk  from  dairies  scoring  68  (Equip- 
ment 25,  Method  43)  delivered  at  our  condensary  or  Goshen  Village  Plant  as 
follows: 

Test  April  May  June  July        August  September 

3.3..  .  SI  40          $1  15          $1  09          $1  35          $1  51          $1  60 


3.4 1  43 

3.5 1  46 

3.6 1  49 

3.7 1  52 

3.8..  .  1  55 


3.9., 
4.O.. 
4.1.. 
4.2.. 
4.3., 


58 
61 


18  1  12  1  38  1  54  1  63 

21  1  15  1  41  1  57  1  66 

24  1  18  1  44  1  60  1  69 

27  1  21  1  47  1  63  1  72 

30  1  24  1  50  1  66  1  75 

33  1  27  1  53  1  69  1  78 

36  L  30  1  56  1  72  1  81 


64  1  39  1  33  1  59  1  75  1  84 
67  1  42  1  36  1  62  1  78  1  87 
70  1  45  1  39  1  65  1  81  1  90 


For  other  milk  accepted,  prices  will  be  lOc  less  per  cwt.  than  given  above. 

Operating  under  the  Dairymen's  League  agreement,  apparently, 
the  Locust  Farms  Company  in  October,  1916,  issued  the  following 
notice  or  contract: 

LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY. 

NEW  YORK,  October  14,  1916. 
Mr.  M.  Starr,  Billings,  N.  Y.: 

To  the  Patrons  of  This  Creamery 

Dear  Sir. —  The  Locust  Farms  Company  hereby  announce  the  following 
prices  for  milk  testing  5  per  cent,  butter  fat,  and  eligible  for  Grade  A 
pasteurized  for  the  6  months  from  October  1st,  1916  to  March  31st,  1917. 

$2.85  per  100  cwt.  for  October. 
2 . 95  per  100  cwt.  for  Novemebr. 
2.95  perflOO  cwt.  for  December. 
2 . 85  per.100  cwt.  for  January. 
2.80  perjlOO  cwt.  for  February. 
2.75  perJlOO  cwt.  for  March. 

Avith  a  deduction  of  3  cents  per  100  cwt.  for  each  point  in  butter  fat  below 
5  per  cent. 

The  prices  for  the  last  three  months  mentioned  are  subject  to  revision  by 
a  committee  to  consider  the  cost  of  production,  distribution  and  market 
conditions.  Yours  truly, 

LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY, 

A.  CUDDEBACK,  President. 

Prior  thereto  and  on  September  18,  1916,  the  same  company 
Issued  a  similar  notice,  but  with  the  following  prices: 

October $2  65 

November 2  80 

December 2  80 

January 2  65 

February 2  60 

March 2  55 


180 

In  March,  1915,  the  Locust  Farms  Company  for  the  same  sta- 
tion issued  the  following  contract: 

AGREEMENT  BETWEEN  E.  W.  Roylance  and  LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK,  Mar.  15,  1915. 

Mr.  E.  W.  Roylance,  party  of  the  first  part,  hereby  agrees  to  sell  and  deliver 
at  the  creamery  of  the  Locust  Farms  Company,  party  of  the  second  part,  at 
Billings,  N.  Y.,  all  the  pure  and  untainted  milk  product  of  his  or  her  dairy, 
amounting  to  about: 

Per  cwt. 

pounds  per  day  in  April,  at SI  55 

pounds  per  day  in  May,  at 1  30 

pounds  per  day  in  June,  at 

pounds  per  day  in  July,  at 1  40 

pounds  per  day  in  August,  at 1  56 

pounds  per  day  in  September,  at 1  65 

pounds  per  day  in  October,  at 

pounds  per  day  in  November,  at .... 

pounds  per  day  in  December,  at .... 

pounds  per  day  in  January,  at .... 

pounds  per  day  in  February,  at 

pounds  per  day  in  March,  at .... 


NOTE.— Grade  C  Milk  10  cents  per  cwt,  less.  Milk  below  3.60  butter  fat  10 
cents  per  cwt.  less. 

The  Locust  Farms  Company  hereby  agrees  to  buy  and  does  buy  the  above 
mentioned  product  and  hereby  agrees  to  pay  each  month's  delivery  on  the 
15th  day  of  the  month  following  at  the  prices  above  stated.  Party  of  the  first 
part  hereby  agrees  to  comply  with  the  regulations  of  the  New  York  City 
Department  of  Health,  to  feed  no  wet  brewers'  grains  during  the  term  of  this 
agreement. 

1.  This  milk  must  be  delivered  at  the  creamery  at  the  temperature  of  50 
degrees  Far.,  or  below  and  it  must  be  delivered  at  such  time  as  the  creamery 
superintendent  may  require. 

2.  The  milk  from  any  cow  suspected  of  being  ill  shall  be  discarded  from  the 
herd  milk. 

3.  Cans  and  utensils  must  not  be  cleaned  or  stored  at  the  house  where  there 
is  any  contagious  disease. 

4.  All  milk  utensils  must  be  scrupulously  clean  before  using,  and  no  milk 
shall  be  kept  in  a  living  room,  or  a  room  connected  with  the  stable. 

5.  The  cow  stables  to  be  whitewashed  twice  a  year,  in  the  spring  and  fall. 

6.  A  veterinary's  certificate  as  per  forms  furnished  by  the  New  York  City 
Department  of  Health  to  be  furnished   at  the  expense  of  the  party  of  the 
second  part,  on  or  before  June  1st,  showing  the  physical  condition  of  the  herd. 

7.  It  is  mutually  agreed  by  the  parties  hereto  that  the  right  is  reserved 
to  the  Locust  Farms  Company  to  terminate  this  contract  at  any  time  under 
the  following  conditions:     In  case  of  lire  or  other  accidents  to  the  buildings 
or  machinery,  or  in  case  of  a  strike  or  a  tie-up  on  the  railroad,  or  any  other 
conditions  not  under  the  control  of  the  said  Locust  Farms  Company,  which 
would  make  it  impossible  to  market  the  milk. 


181 

It  is  further  agreed  that  a  bonus  of  3  cents  per  cwt.  for  each  one-tenth  per 
cent  butter  fat,  over  and  above  4  per  cent  will  be  paid,  and  that  any  milk 
testing  below  3.6  per  cent,  for  butter  fat,  or  below  the  legal  standard  in  solids 
shall  terminate  this  contract  at  the  option  of  the  party  of  the  second  part. 

IX  WITNESS  WHEREOF  the  parties  have  hereunto  set  their  hands  this 
March  23,  1915. 


LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY, 

Per  M.  STABB. 

HISTORY  or  A  "  DAIRYMEN'S  PLAN  "  AND  METHOD  OF  DISPOSING 

OF  PRODUCT 

Mr.  JOHN  D.  MOORE,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

I  live  in  Lowville  and  am  connected  with  the  Lowville  Milk  and 
Cream  Company.  That  is  a  co-operative  company.  They  are  capi- 
talized at  $5,000.  It  was  incorporated  in  1901.  $4,700  was  paid 
in.  The  capital  was  not  sufficient  to  build  and  equip  the  station. 
It  cost  in  the  neighborhood  of  $16,000  to  date.  We  commenced 
shipping  milk  in  February,  1902,  and  it  was  not  then  complete. 
Instead  of  making  cheese,  we  sold  the  milk  or  leased  the  factory 
to  the  Howell  Milk  and  Cream  Company.  Then  we  put  on  addi- 
tions to  the  building  and  sewerage,  a  reservoir  for  water  and  pipe 
system.  Our  only  equipment  was  for  making  cheese  and  weighing 
cans.  The  Howell  Company  equipped  it  as  a  milk  station  and  put 
in  a  condensing  plant  at  their  own  expense.  They  paid  us  $400 
rent  to  commence  with.  We  put  in  cement  floors  and  we  built  an 
addition  to  the  ice  house;  it  cost  in  the  neighborhood  of  $6,000 
three  or  four  years  ago.  We  issued  bonds  to  the  amount  of  $4,500 
and  borrowed  money  from  the  bank.  The  bonds  were  secured  by 
a  first  mortgage  and  the  stockholders  took  the  bonds.  We  sold  the 
milk  to  the  Howell  Company  for  about  seven  years.  Then  we 
sold  it  to  the  Alexander  Campbell  Company  of  Brooklyn.  Howell 
moved  out  his  condensing  plant.  We  were  dissatisfied  with  that 
company  who  were  shipping  milk  to  New  York  and  we  did  not 
renew  the  lease  with  them,  but  found  a  new  tenant.  We  made 
cheese  there  for  a  short  time  after  Howell  left  until  the  Compbell 
lease.  Our  present  lease  is  to  the  Alexander  Campbell  Milk  Com- 
pany ;  it  runs  for  a  term  of  two  years  and  eleven  months  from  the 
1st-  of  November,  1915,  to  September  3,  1918.  That  company 
pays  us  $800  a  year  rent  for  the  plant.  The  $800  would  not  pay  the 


182 

interest  and  the  expense  of  maintaining  the  plant.  Our  company 
pays  the  interest,  taxes,  repairs  and  up-keep. which  amounts  to  three 
or  four  hundred  dollars  a  year.  The  company  gets  a  dumpage  of  one 
cent  per  hundred  pounds  of  the  milk  that  is  put  in  from  the  patrons 
and  stockholders  and  out  of  that  makes  a  fund  which  pays  the  in- 
terest. The  Campbell  Company  draw  their  checks  to  the  Low- 
ville  Milk  and  Cream  Company.  When  it  gets  the  check  each 
month,  we  take  out  one  cent  per  hundred  pounds  dumpage  from 
each  man  for  the  amount  of  milk  he  has  drawn  and  give  him  a 
check  for  the  balance.  Whether  they  are  stockholders  or  not  they 
pay  the  same  charge  of  one  cent  per  hundred  pounds.  The  original 
contract  between  our  company  and  the  Campbell  Company  was  a  a 
follows : 

THIS  LEASE  AND  AGREEMENT,  made  this  first  day  of  September,  1912, 
between  THE  LOWVILLE  MILK  AND  CKEAM  COMPANY,  a  corporation  duly  or- 
ganized under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  York,  of  Lowville,  N.  Y.,  party 
of  the  first  part,  and  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  COMPANY,  also  a 
corporation  duly  organized  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  York,  with  its 
principal  offices  at  No.  802  Fulton  street,  Brooklny,  N.  Y.,  party  of  the  second 
part,  WITNESSETH. 

In  consideration  of  the  rents  and  covenants  hereinafter  expressed,  the  said 
party  of  the  first  part  has  demised  and  leased,  and  does  hereby  demise  and 
lease  to  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  the  following  premises,  viz:  All  that 
Tract  or  Parcel  of  Land,  situated  in  the  village  of  Lowville,  Lewis  County, 
New  York,  bounded  Westerly  by  the  Railroad;  Southerly  by  Bostwick  Street; 
Easterly  by  land  owned  by  William  Holzworth;  and  Northerly  by  the  land 
formerly  owned  by  and  occupied  by  W.  G.  Conover,  excepting  the  right  of  way, 
and  including  the  Milk  Station  buildings  thereon,  with  the  appurtances  and 
privileges,  for  and  during  the  term  of  one  year  from  September  1st,  1912, 
which  term  will  end  August  31st,  1913,  with  all  tools  and  appliances  now  at 
said  station  that  are  owned  by  first  party,  including  the  well  and  pump. 

First  party  agrees  to  keep  said  buildings  and  drains  in  good  condition,  and 
in  all  respects  so  as  to  comply  with  the  rules,  regulations  and  requirements  of 
the  Health  Department  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

The  said  party  of  the  second  part  covenants  that  it  will  pay  to  the  party  of 
the  first  part  for  the  use  of  said  premises  and  property,  the  annual  rent  of 
Eight  Hundred  Dollars,  quarterly  thereafter  during  said  term,  $200  ($200) 
each  three  months,  commencing  December  1st,  1912,  and  provided  second  party 
shall  fail  to  pay  said  rent,  or  any  part  thereof,  when  it  becomes  due,  it  is 
agreed  that  first  party  may  sue  for  same,  or  re-enter  and  re-take  possession  of 
said  premises  and  property,  or  resort  to  any  legal  remedy, 

Second  party  is  to  have  free  use  of  the  spring  water  as  now  brought  to  said 
station. 

Second  part}7  has  the  privilege  of  placing  in  the  building  any  necessary  ad- 
ditional machinery  and  to  have  the  right  to  remove  the  same  during  said  term. 


183 

The  party  of  the  second  part  covenants  that  at  the  expiration  of  said  term 
it  will  surrender  up  said  premises  to  the  party  of  the  first  part,  including  said 
equipment  and  personal  property  owned  by  first  party,  in  as  good  condition  as 
when  possession  is  taken,  necessary  wear  and  damages  by  elements  exempted. 

It  is  further  agreed  that  the  party  of  the  first  part,  in  consideration  of  the 
covenants  herein  contained,  agrees  to  sell  and  deliver  to  the  party  of  the  second 
part  at  aforesaid  premises,  from  the  1st  day  of  September,  1912,  to  and  includ- 
ing the  31st  day  of  August,  1913,  all  the  milk  produced  by  the  stockholders  of 
the  first  party,  who  delivers  their  milk  to  the  said  station  or  factory  for  the 
entire  year  and  to  such  stockholders,  who  may  live  at  too  great  a  distance  to 
deliver  their  milk  to  the  station  or  factory  during  the  summer  months,  they 
may  deliver  their  milk  to  the  station  or  factory  from  the  1st  day  of  November, 

1912,  to  and  including  the  28th  day  of  February,    1913,    unless    such    patron's 
milk  is  wanted  for  a  longer  period  by  the  party  of  the  second  part,  except  tho 
cheese  factory  patrons  who  will  provide  ice  to  deliver  their  milk  from  July  15, 

1913,  if  called  upon  by  the  second  partjr,  their  milk  will  be  received  from  No- 
vember 1,  1912,  to  and  including  the  31st  day  of  March,  1913. 

The  party  of  the  second  part  agrees  to  take  on  new  patrons  at  any  time  of 
the  year,  provided  they  agree  to  bring  their  milk  the  whole  year,  and  also  pro- 
vided that  their  buildings  and  surroundings  meet  with  the  requirements  of  the 
Board  of  Health  of  New  York  City. 

The  stockholders  and  producers  of  such  milk  agree  to  draw  four-fifths  of  the 
milk  produced  by  them  once  daily  during  the  summer  months,  in  the  morning, 
and  are  to  use  a  suitable  aerator  for  cooling  the  night's  milk  to  50  degrees  or 
52  degrees  Far.  at  once  and  deliver  such  milk  cooled  as  aforesaid  at  the  sta- 
tion aforesaid  at  a  temperature  not  exceeding  55  degrees  Far. 

Said  milk  shall  be  delivered  by  each  farmer,  pure,  sweet  and  clean  and  in 
good  healthful  and  marketable  condition,  containing  not  less  than  11%  per 
cent,  solids  and  produced  in  places  that  have  been  approved  and  accepted  by 
the  inspectors  of  the  Department  of  Health  of  the  City  of  New  York,  and  shall 
comply  in  all  respects  with  the  rules,  regulations  and  requirements  of  the 
Health  Department  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Second  party  shall  have  the  right  to  reject  and  decline  to  receive  at  said  sta- 
tion any  milk  which  does  not  comply  with  the  conditions  and  requirements 
aforesaid,  or  is  delivered  at  said  station  later  than  nine  o'clock  a.  m.  during  the 
summer  months. 

The  party  of  the  second  part  hereby  agrees  to  accept  and  receive  all  milk 
produced  and  delivered  in  a  clean  and  sound  condition  as  above  provided 
and  within  the  time  aforesaid  and  to  pay  the  party  of  the  first  part  for  the 
same  monthly,  that  is  to  say,  on  or  before  the  tenth  of  each  month  for  all  the 
milk  delivered  up  to  and  including  the  last  day  of  the  previous  'current  month, 
the  price  to  be  paid  for  such  milk  for  the  months  of  March,  April  and  May 
shall  be  one-half  cent  per  quart  less  than  the  price  made  and  quoted  by  the 
New  York  Consolidated  Milk  Exchange,  LIMITED,  during  the  same  months. 
For  the  months  of  September,  October,  November,  December  and  January  shall 
be  six  cents  per  can  less  than  the  prices  so  made  and  quoted.  For  the  months 
of  February,  June,  July  and  August  shall  be  one-fourth  cent  per  quart  less 
than  the  price  so  made  and  quoted.  In  case  the  price  received  for  the  milk 
figures  a  fraction  over  the  one-half  cent,  first  party  is  to  receive  the  full  cent 


184 

and  in  cases  where  the  fraction  is  less  than  the  one-half,  the  fraction  is  to  be 
taken  off.  All  calculations  and  figures  are  to  be  based  on  85  pounds  to  a  forty 
quart  can  of  milk.  Said  prices  are  to  govern  during  the  term  of  this  lease. 

The  party  of  the  second  part  agrees  to  keep  and  provide  a  capable  man  at 
the  said  station  and  premises  during  the  term  of  this  lease,  to  receive,  weigh 
and  keep  an  honest  daily  account  and  statement  of  the  milk  of  each  of  the  pa- 
trons delivering  the  same  as  hereinbefore  mentioned  and  each  day  shall  deliver 
u  copy  thereof  to  the  party  of  the  first  part  at  their  office  in  the  village  of 
Lowville,  New  York. 

The  producers  of  such  milk  shall  each  and  every  one  of  them  be  required  to 
cause  all  milk  delivered  by  them  to  be  run  or  strained  through  a  suitable  aera- 
tor and  the  party  of  the  second  part  shall  have  the  right,  through  a  suitable 
representative,  of  examining  all  aerators  in  use  by  the  various  persons  deliver- 
ing milk  with  the  view  of  determining  whether  such  aerators  are  properly  used 
and  kept  in  a  clean  and  wholesome  condition. 

First  party  is  to  pay  all  taxes  and  insurance  on  the  property  hereby  leased 
during  said  term. 

It  is  understood  and  agreed  that  in  case  the  aforesaid  station  is  destroyed  or 
rendered  unfit  for  use  by  fire,  cyclone,  tornado  or  wind-storm  whereby  it  could 
not  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  receiving,  caring  for  or  shipping  the  milk,  the 
party  of  the  second  part  shall  continue  the  milk,  if  the  party  of  the  first  part 
so  requires  and  the  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  construct  on  said  prem- 
ises a  temporary  building  for  receiving  and  shipping  the  milk  for  such  a  time 
as  may  be  required  in  reconstruction  of  the  damaged  building. 

In  case  party  of  the  second  part  shall  at  any  time  during  the  continuance  of 
the  contract  be  desirous  of  purchasing  more  milk  than  is  provided  by  the  stock- 
holders of  the  party  of  the  first  part,  the  said  party  of  the  second  part  shall 
notify  the  Secretary  of  the  first  part  of  such  desire  and  thereupon  the  first 
party  shall  have  the  first  chance  to  supply  such  additional  quantity  of  milk 
delivered  from  outside  sources  within  the  territory  of  the  said  station  or  fac- 
tory upon  like  terms. 

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF,  The  said  parties  of  the  first  and  second  parts 
have  caused  its  several  corporate  seals  to  be  hereto  affixed  and  this  instrument 
to  be  subscribed  by  its  President  and  Secretary  the  day  and  year  first  above 
written. 

LOWVILLE  MILK  AND  CREAM  COMPANY. 

President. 

Secretary. 

ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  MILK  COMPANY. 

President. 

Secretary. 

The  same  contract  was  continued,  except  that  the  prices  are 
changed  as  follows l. 

The  prices  to  be  paid  for  the  months  of  April,  May,  June,  July,  August  and 
September,  1915,  shall  be  based  on  the  highest  price  paid  for  average  Fancy 
Cheese  for  each  of  the  said  months,  as  shall  be  quoted  in  the  Journal  of  Com- 
merce and  the  New  York  Bulletin  each  Wednesday  of  the  period,  and  the  aver- 


185 

age  price  for  the  month  calculated  therefrom.  The  number  of  pounds  of  milk 
to  make  a  pound  of  cheese  to  be  determined  from  the  average  of  this  year's 
make  of  cheese  from  four  cheese  factories  in  Lewis  County,  two  to  be  selected 
by  each  party.  For  Grade  C  Milk  the  price  will  be  ten  cents  per  100  pounds 
less.  In  case  the  price  received  for  the  milk  figures  a  fraction  over  the  one-half 
cent,  first  party  is  to  receive  full  cent  and  in  cases  where  the  fraction  is  les;s 
than  one-half,  the  fraction  is  to  be  taken  off.  All  calculations  and  figures  are 
to  be  based  on  85  pounds  to  a  forty-quart  can  of  milk.  Said  prices  are  to  gov- 
ern during  the  term  of  this  lease. 

The  present  contract  made  in  1915  is  substantially  the  same 
in  its  provisions,  except  as  to  price,  which  now  provides : 

The  second  party  agrees  to  pay  the  price  per  100  pounds  of  Grade  B  and 
Grade  C  milk  as  is  paid  by  the  Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Company  each  month 
during  the  term  and  life  of  this  lease,  as  quoted  in  the  Milk  Reporter,  pub- 
lished at  Sussex,  New  Jersey,  on  3.7  test.  No  butter  fat  decrease  or  increase 
to  be  calculated  or  paid.  It  is  agreed  that  all  calculations  or  figures  are  to  be 
based  on  85  pounds  to  a  40-quart  can  of  milk  and  said  prices  to  govern  during 
the  term  and  life  of  this  lease  and  agreement. 

NOTE. — This  agreement  runs  to  September  30,   1918. 

Mr.  Moore. —  Whatever  the  Borden  price  is,  our  patrons  must 
be  satisfied  under  this  contract.  We  have  in  the  neighborhood  of 
100  stockholders,  but  they  are  only  delivering  about  20  cans  daily 
now.  (October  10,  1916.)  We  had  in  September  about  150  cans, 
but  they  have  cut  it  out  and  put  it  into  the  cheese  factory  last 
Saturday.  We  commenced  shipping  in  February,  1902.  The 
first  two  years  we  sold  to  Howell  on  a  cheese  basis.  We  figured 
10  pounds  of  milk  to  a  pound  of  cheese  and  took  the  quotations  in 
the  New  York  Bulletin  on  each  Wednesday  during  the  month. 
We  made  cheese  in  October,  1915.  The  Campbell  contract  run 
out  and  we  made  a  temporary  contract  on  a  cheese  basis  for  six 
months  until  we  made  the  last  contract.  In  1915,  we  took  in 
7,176,000  pounds  of  milk  and  our  corporation  got  about  $717.60 
for  the  dumpage.  We  charged  the  stockholders  and  non-stock- 
holders all  alike  and  that  with  the  lease  money  would  pay  the 
interest  on  the  stock  of  the  people  and  the  mortgage  and  kept  up 
the  taxes  and  insurance.  We  owe  now  approximately  $5,000. 
We  have  no  pasteurizer.  The  milk  is  shipped  to  Brooklyn  and 
pasteurized  there.  The  plant  is  only  equipped  for  cheese  making 
and  shipping.  The  freight  rate  from  here  to  ^N"ew  York  is  32 
cents,  as  I  understand  it,  per  can.  In  June,  1916,  we  got  $1.20  for 


186 

milk  and  $1.30  for  B  milk."  (.Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker 
Company  were  paying  in  Steuben  County  at  one  of  their  plants 
$1.34  and  drawing  the  milk.  The  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson- 
Decker  Company  were  paying  at  Hornell  in  Steuben  county  $1.47, 
farmers  drawing  it,  for  3.7  milk.  The  Borden  published  price 
for  July  was  $1.40.) 

Mr.  Moore. —  Our  July  price  was  $1.30  for  C  milk  and  $1.40 
for  B  Milk. 

EXISTING  CONTRACTS  OF  THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

AGREEMENT  No.  1 

AGREEMENT  MADE  THIS  7th  day  of  October,  1916,  between  the  Dairy- 
men's League,  a  corporation  organized  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  Jer- 
sey as  agent,  party  of  the  first  part,  and  the  undersigned  milk  distributers 
located  in  New  York  City,  parties  of  the  second  part,  witnesseth: 

The  parties  hereto  in  consideration  of  the  premises  herein  and  the  sum  of 
One  Dollar  by  each  to  the  other  in  hand  paid,  the  receipt  whereof  is  hereby  ac- 
knowledged, do  hereby  mutually  promise  and  agree  as  follows : 

1.  The  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  sell  and  deliver  at  various  shipping 
stations  and  creameries  of  the  parties  of  the  second  part,  and  the  parties  of  the 
second  part  agree  to  take  and  pay  for  as  hereinafter  provided,  each  day  during 
the  period  covered  by  this  contract  all  of  the  milk  produced  by  the  members  of 
the  .party  of  the  first  part  from  whom  the  party  of  the  second  part  is  now  or  has 
been  receiving  milk  if  not  previously  sold,  and  such  additional  quantity  of  milk 
required  by  the  second  parties,  shall,  if  possible,  b~e  obtained  from  the  party  of 
the  first  part.    It  is  understood  that  all  milk  sold  under  the  agreement  shall  be 
of  good  quality  and  must  pass  the  inspection  and  approval  of  the  authorities  of 
the  State  of  New  York  and  Municipality  of  New  York  City. 

2.  The  parties  of  the  second  part  agree  to  pay  to  the  party  of  the  first  part 
for  all  milk  received  by  it  at  its  said  stations  from  the  party  of  the  first  part 
the  following  schedule  of  minimum  prices  for  Grade  B  milk  testing  three  per 
cent,  butter  fat. 

First  Second 

Per  hundred  pounds.  district        district 

October $215  $2  05 

November 2  25  2  15 

December 2  25  2  15 

January 2  25  2  05 

February 2  10  2  00 

March 2  05  1  95 

Three  cents  per  hundred  pounds  of  milk  added  for  each  one-tenth  increase  in 
butter  fat. 

Grade  C  milk  10  cents  less  per  hundred  pounds  as  heretofore. 

3.  The  party  of  the  second  part  hereby  agrees  to  pay  on  or  before  the  10th 
day  of  each  month  for  all  milk  received  by  it  from  the  16th  day  up  to  and  in- 
cluding the  last  day,  inclusive  of  the  previous  month,  and  also  agree  to  pay  on 
or  before  the  25th  dav  of  the  month  for  all  milk  received  by  it  between  the  1st 


187 

and  15th  day,  inclusive  of  the  current  month,  or  has  been  the  custom  of  each 
of  the  distributers  herein.  The  parties  of  the  second  part  further  agree  out  of 
the  purchase  price  aforesaid  to  pay  the  sum  of  one  cent  per  hundred  pounds  to 
the  treasurer  of  the  Dairymen's  League  at  his  office  at  Sussex,  New  Jersey,  or 
his  successor  where  the  said  successor  may  have  his  office,  and  the  balance  of 
the  purchase  price  to  the  producers  of  the  said  milk. 

4.  It  is  further  understood  that  in  case  the  parties  of  the  second  part  have 
not  filed  with  the  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  or  with  other  proper  authority 
the   bond   required  by  law  for  a  milk  gathering  station,  then  it  is  agreed  that 
each  of  the  parties  of  the  second  part  is  to  furnish  the  party  of  the  first  part 
with  a  surety  company  bond,  satisfactory  in  form  to  the  party  of  the  first  part 
in  the  sum  of  not  less  than 

dollars,  conditioned  upon  the  prompt  payment  of  all  moneys  due  or  to  become 
due  under  this  agreement  and  for  the  whole  performance  of  this  agreement  ac- 
cording to  its  terms. 

5.  It  is  further  understood  and  agreed  that  this  contract   is    to   begin    and 
take  effect  on  the  7th  day  of  October,  1916,  and  to  continue  for  a  period  of  six 
months  from  that  date. 

6.  THE  PRICES  SET  FORTH  IX  PARAGRAPH  TWO  HEREOF  FOR  THE 
MONTHS    OF    JANUARY,    FEBRUARY   AND   MARCH,    1917,   SHALL   BE 
SUBJECT    TO    REVISION    AND    MODIFICATION  BY  AN  ARBITRATION 
BOARD  to  be  appointed  as  hereinafter  provided  upon  condition  that  said  board 
shall  decide  that  said  prices  shall  exceed  the  actual  cost  of  production  of  said 
milk  during  said  months  plus  a  reasonable  profit  thereon.      Said   board    shall 
consist  of  fivie  members,  who  shall  be  appointed  as  follows:    Two   members   by 
each  of  the  parties  hereto  and  the  fifth  member  by  the  said  four  members  thus 
appointed. 

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF  the  Dairymen's  League  has  hereunto  signed  its 
official  signature  by  R.  D.  Cooper  of  its  Executive  Committee  and  the  party  of 
the  second  part  has  hereunto  set  his  hand  and  seal. 

DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE, 

By  R.  D.  Cooper. 
In  the  presence  of 

F.  H.  THOMPSON. 

The  Empire  State  Dairy  Co.,  C.  Neidner,  Vice-Pres. 
Wm.  Burgers,  for  Standard  Dairy  Company. 
Central  Dairy  Co.,  by  Chas.  Vonhof,  Jr.,  Sec. 
New  York  Dairy  Produce  Co.,  Wm.  J.  Blair,  Pres. 
National  Dairy  Co.,  by  Chris.  Oher. 
James  C.  Ridner  &  Co.,  Geo.  W.  Rider,  Secy. 
Zellner  Bros.,  Inc.,  by  Jacob  Zellner. 
Ullman  &  Hauk  Dairy  Co.,  by  C.  Hauk. 


188 

GENTLEMEN'S  AGREEMENT  NOT  SIGNED  BUT  UNDERSTOOD  TO  BE 
ENTERED  INTO  BETWEEN  THE  REPRESENTATIVES  OF  THE  DAIRY- 
MEN'S LEAGUE  AND  THE  LARGER  MILK  BUYERS  ON  OCTOBER  14, 

AGREEMENT  No.  3,  MADE  ON  OCTOBER  14,  1916 
(The  only  one  in  force  at  the  present  time  with  the  big  companies) 

Dealers  are  to  announce  to  their  Receiving  Stations  that  for  the  months  of 
October  to  March  31st,  they  will  pay  45  cents  advance  over  Borden's  price  for 
the  corresponding  months  of  1915  and  1916,  such  prices  to  be  firm  for  three 
months  (October,  November  and  December),  and  as  to  January,  February  and 
March,  1917,  are  to  be  subjected  to  revision  and  modification  by  a  Committee 
which  is  to  be  appointed:  t'.vo  by  the  Dealers,  two  by  the  Producers  and  they 
to  appoint  a  fifth,  who  are. to  consider  the  cost  of  production,  distribution  and 
market  conditions  and  arrive  at  a  price  fair  and  equitable  to  both  parties. 
This  Committee  to  be  appointed  and  organized  within  thirty  days  from  this 
date,  October  14,  1916. 

The  Dairymen's  League  contracts  above  set  out  seeni  to  be 
the  first  attempt  to  introduce  uniformity  into  the  purchase  of  tins 
product.  The  various  types  of  contracts  and  offers  above  set 
forth  show  many  different  forms,  methods  and  elements  of  value. 
If  on  examination  they  are  found  to  be  confusing  and  mystifying 
to  the  ordinary  reader,  it  is  evident  that  they  will  be  equally  con- 
fusing and  mystifying  and  difficult  to  understand  by  the  ordinary 
dairyman  who  is  not  able  to  give  a  great  deal  of  time  and  study  to 
the  matter.  These  type  contracts  and  methods  of  making  prices 
are  reported  here  not  for  the  value  of  any  particular  method  or 
instrument  set  out,  but  for  the  purpose  of  affording  a  view  of  the 
many  different  prevailing  conditions  under  which  milk  is  sold. 
In  order  that  a  clear  view  of  these  varying  conditions  may  also 
be  had,  the  Committee  reports  herewith  statistics  of  prices  actually 
paid  for  milk  in  various  sections  of  the  State  during  various  years. 

BORDEN'S  PRICES,  SUMMER  OF  1916 
SHORT  HAUL 

3.3  butter  fat 

April $1  40 

May 1  15 

June 1  09 

July 1  35 

August 1  51 

September 1  60 

These  prices  were  increased  10  cents  per  100  pounds  for  the 
months  of  April,  May,  June  and  July,  as  disclosed  by  the  evi- 
dence. 


189 


BORDEN'S  SUMMER  CONTRACT  PRICES..  1916 
LONG  HAUL 

3.3  butter  fat 

April $1  30 

May 1  05 

June 99 

July 1  25 

August 1  41 

September 1  50 


These  prices  were  likewise  increased  10  cents  per  hundred  dur- 
ing some  of  the  months.  An  additional  3  cents  per  hundred 
pounds  was  paid  for  each  additional  one-tenth  of  butter  fat  shown 
by  the  test.  Dairymen  scoring  less  than  25%  on  equipment  and 
43%  on  methods,  received  10  cents  per  hundred  pounds  less  than 
the"  above  schedule. 

The  Locust  Farms  Company  paid  at  Billings,  ^T.  Y.,  the  fol- 
lowing prices  for  6%  milk,  with  a  deduction  of  o%  for  each  one- 
tenth  per  cent,  of  butter  fat. 

Per  cwt. 

April $2  06 

May 1  81 

June 1  75 

July 1  96 

August 2  12 

September 2  21 


This  made  the  price  of  this  Company  for  3.3  milk,  score  68, 
as  follows: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  55 

May 1  30 

June 1  24 

July '.'.'.'.'.  1  45 

August 1  61 

September 1  70 

The  Levy  Dairy  Company  paid  at  Bartlett,  N.  Y.,  as  follows : 

Per  cwt. 

May $1  24 

June 1  08 

July 1  34 

August 1  50 


190 

The  Chemung  Valley  Dairy  Products  Company  in  the  summer 
of  1916  paid  the  following  prices: 

Per  cwt. 
April..  $1  40 


May. 

June 

July 

August .  . . 
September 


27 
05 
27 
51 
63 


Ten  cents  per  100  pounds  added  for  milk  testing  4%. 

HORSEHEADS    CREAMERY    COMPANY    PRICES 

Per  cwt. 

April . .                                                              $1  35 

May 1  10 

June 1  05 

July 1  25 

August 1  40 

September 1  50 

October 1  65 

November  (proposed) 1  75 

With  10  cents  per  hundred  pounds  for  all  milk  testing  4  per  cent  butter  fat 
or  better. 

F.  X  Baumert  £  Co.,  of  Antwerp,  paid  for  milk  containing  3.4 
butter  fat,  with  a  premium  of  3  cents  for  each  additional  point : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  40 

May 1  40 

June 1  40 

July 1  40 

August 1  50 

September 1  60 

The  Standard  Dairy  Company  paid  at  Sauquoit,  N.  Y.,  Grade 
B  milk,  as  follows : 

Per  can  of 
40  quarts 

April $1  25 

May 1  12 

June 105 

July 1  15 

August 1  28 

October. .  .  1  40 


191 

The  Seminole  Condensary,  at  Holland  Patent,  X.  Y.,  paid  for 
1916,  as  follows: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  75 

March 1  68 

April 1  45 

May 1  35 

June 1  25 

July 1  45 

The  shipping  station  at  Adams  Center,  Jefferson  county,  N.  Y., 
in  1916,  paid  the  following  prices: 

Per  cwt. 


January $1  85 

February 1  70 

March 1  60 

April 1  45 

ay 1  40 

June 1  35 


April 
May. 
June. 

The  Rosemary  Creamery,  Adams,  1916  : 


Per  cwt. 

January $1  85 

February 1  70 

March 1  60 

April 1  50 

May 1  40 

June...  1  35 


State  School  Dairy,  Industrial  Department,   Canton: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1 .859 

February 1.777 

March 1.70 

April 1.47 

May 1 . 226 

June...  1.177 


Beake's  Dairy  Company,  Massena: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  80  and  $1.70 

March 1  70-60 

April 1  45 

May 1  30 

June.  .  1  15 


January               

Price 
per  cwt. 
$1.479 

February,            '  

1.584 

March            

1.435 

\pril         

1.341 

May.                           

1.221 

,  .J  
June  

1  .  159 

192 

Model  Dairy  Company,  Greenway,  Oneida  county,  JST.  Y.,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  75 

March 1  65 

April 1  50 

May 1  30  grade  C;  $1.40  grade  B 

June 1  20  grade  C;  $1.30  grade  B 

July 1  30  grade  C;  $1.40  grade  B 

Brushton  Creamery,  Brushton,  Franklin  county,  1ST.  Y.    (Ed- 
ward Gale's  statement),  1916: 

Price 

Test 
4.2 
4.6 
3.6 
3.5 
3.6 
3.5 


Fames'  Cheese  Factory,  Jefferson  county — patrons'  statements 

(ExHiBrrNo.  86) 

Average  Net  price 

pounds  milk  per  100 

Cheese,             Milk               to  pounds  pounds  of 

price            delivered               cheese  milk 

April  27..                          15|                  1,868                10.50  $1.4507 

Mayl 15f                  2,622                11.12  1.37 

May8 16                    1,748                11.36  1.35 

May  15 15|                  2,070                11.10  1.438 

May  22 17i                  2,087                11.20  1.4766 

May  29 17f                  2,252                10.43  1.58 

JuneS 14|                  2,191                10.76  1.27 

June  12 14i                  4,984                10.29  1.2957 

June  19 14f                  3,147                10.55  1.3348 

June  26 15                    3,102                10.66  1.33 

July  3 14|                  3,555                10.62  1.3146 

July  10 14|                  3,193                10.75  1.29 

July  17 14|                  3,340                11.05  1.2477 

July  24 14J                  3,147                11.09  1.20 

Harlem  Dairy  Products  Company,  Clinton,  1ST.  Y.,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  85 

February 1  75 

March 1  70 

April 1  40 

May 1  15 

June 1  10 

July 1  25 

August •   1  40 

September ""'    1  50 


1 

idb, 

f 


193 

Fort  Plain  Milk  Company : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  30 

May 1  10 

June 1  05 

July 1  20 

August 1  35 

September 1  45 


Farmer's  Co-operative  Milk  Company,  Inc.,  at  Poughkeepsie 

Per  cwtt. 

April $1  *£    ''  ' ''  " 

May 1  55 

June 1  45 

July £  SSnlO 

August 2  10 

September 2  10 

October 2  10 

November 2  10 

December 2  10 


Farmer's  Co-operative  Milk  Company,  Wappingers  Falls,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  70 

May 1  40 

June 1  30 

July 1  70 

August . 1  90 

September 1  90 

October 2  00 

November 2  00 

December. . .  2  00 


O.  A.  Weatherly  &  Company,  Milford,  IST.  Y.,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  90 

February 1  85 

March 1  80 

Borden's  prices  for  summer  of  1916.     Clover-Dale  Farms  Com- 
pany, Binghamton,  ~N.  Y.,  Grade  C  Milk : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  50 

May 1  20 

June 1  10 

July 1  30 

August 1  55 

September 1  80 

October 1  95 

November 2  05 

December 2  05 


Ten  cents  additional  for  B  grade  as  scored  by  the  New  York  State  Board  of 
Health.     Ten  cents  additional  for  milk  with  an  average  test  of  4.5  butter  fat. 


194 

Vernon  Milk  Station,  Oneida  County,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  49 

May 1  24 

June 1  18 

Oswego  County  Cheese  Factory,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  44 

M#y. 1  39 

•.  / : :  toe: i  35 


Wfyey  .returned  to  patrons. 

ty  Creamery,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  44 

May 1  27 

June 1  14 


Patrons  returned  skim  milk. 
Oneida  County  Cheese  Factory,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  51 

May 1  34 

June ....  1  275 


Beake's  Dairy  Company,  Franklin,  Delaware  county,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  84 

February 1  82 

March 1  68 

April 1  43 

May 1  30 

June 1  14 

Sheffield    Farms,    Slawson-Decker    Company,    Kichmondville. 
.  Y.,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 
January $2  05 


February 
March. 
April . . 
May .  . 
June . . 


95 
90 
70 
40 
40 

July 1  50 

August 1  65 

September 1  70 


195  . 

Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Co.,  South  Kortwright,  N.  Y., 
1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  70 

May 1  40 

June 1  40 

July 1  50 

August 1  65 

September 1  70 


Delhi  Co-operative  Dairy  Company,   1916;   3%  milk   (allied 
with  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company)  : 

Per  cwt. 

April..  $1  36 

May 1  21 

June 1  08 

Mutual  McDermott  Milk  &  Cream  Co.,  Burke,  Franklin  county, 
K  Y.,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  85 

February 1  75 

March 1  60 

April 1  50 

May 1  30 

June 1  25 

July 1  35 

August 1  45    • 


Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Co.,  contract  at  Malone,  N.  Y., 
1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  50 

May 1  30 

June 1  25 

July 1  40 

August 1  45 

September 1  50 

The  contract  was  made  and  signed  as  follows : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  40 

May 1  10 

June 1  05 

July 1  30 

But  it  was  increased  as  above  by  the  Company. 


.  196 

The  Malone  contract,  differs  from  the  Richmondville  contracts 
given  above  principally  in  this  provision:  "Second:  The  first 
party  agrees  to  pay  in  addition  to  stated  prices  3  cents  a  point 
per  hundred  pounds  for  butter  fat  from  3.8  to  5%.  There  will  be 
a  deduction  of  3  cents  per  100  pounds  for  each  one-tenth  per  cent, 
below  3.8." 

Beake's  Dairy  Company,  E.  Freetown,  Cortland  county,  1916: 

Grade  B 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  45 

May 1  35 

June 1  25 

July 1  40 


Grade  C  10  cents  less. 

Brown  and  Bailey  Condensed  Milk  Company,  Big  Flats,  Che- 
mung  county,  3.8  milk,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April.  .  $1  55 

May 1  35 

June 1  25 

July 1  40 

Chemung  Valley  Condensing  Company,  formerly  Newark  Milk 
and  Oream  Company,  North  Chemung: 

Per 
40- quart  can 

April $1  20 

May 1  00 

June 1  10 

July 1  10 

August , .         1  25 

September 

Fairfield  Dairy  Company,  Montclair,  N.  J.,  prices  on  farm 
railroad  platform  in  Tioga  county,  grade  A,  raw,  New  Jersey 
requirements;  1916,  April,  May,  June,  July,  August  and  Sep- 
tember, 33  1/3  cents  per  hundred  pounds  above  Borden's  actual 
prices,  with  butter  fat  test. 

(NOTE. — These  producers  were  required  to  have  special  barn  equipment  for 
sterilizing  utensils,  etc.) 


197 

Alexander  Campbell  Milk  Co.  prices  at  Candor,  N.  Y.,  B  milk, 
testing  3.7.     1916: 

Per  cwt. 
April $1  32 


May.. . 

June 

July 

August .  . . 
September 


07 
01 
27 
43 
52 


Three  cents  additional  for  each  pound  of  butter  fat  above  3.7.  Five  cents 
additional  per  hundred  pounds  of  milk  for  all  milk  showing  a  bacterial  count 
not  exceeding  40,000  pier  cubic  centimeter. 

Martin's  Tioga  Dairy,  Tioga  Center,  N.  Y.,  alleged  Borden's 
long  haul  price,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  61 

May 1  36 

June 1  30 

July 1  56 


Delivered  at  station. 

Levy  Smith  of  Newark,  N.  J.,  prices  paid  at  Tioga  Center, 
' 


Per  cwt. 
January  ........................................       $1  84 


February  16-29  

1  75 

March  1-16  

1  74 

April 

1  55 

May      . 

1  30 

June  

1  24 

July  

1  5a 

August  

1  50 

September  

1  78 

No  butter  fat. 

Newark  Milk  and  Cream  Company,  Ashland,  N.  Y.  Mr. 
Wright  called  and  testified :  "  I  am  manager  of  this  creamery. 
This  company  does  not  pay  a  uniform  price  in  all  their  stations. 
It  is  this  way.  I  think  they  have  a  plant  somewhere  where  they 
have  to  churn  very  largely  and  where  they  have  to  make  gome 
cheese  and  I  think  they  go  there  and  are  candid  about  it  and  say, 
'  Now,  we  expect  to  make  butter  here  and  cheese  here  a  great  deal 
of  the  time.  Part  of  the  time  we  may  have  to  ship  milk.'  Of 
course,  this  is  from  conversations  that  I  have  heard  and  not  from 
any  positive  knowledge,  but  I  think  they  have  such  places.  I  can 


198 

give  you  the  prices  paid  at  Ashland  in  January,  February,  March, 
April  and  May.    They  are  as  follows: 

Per 
quart 

January 03875 

February 0362 

March 03625 

April 03 

May 02625 

These  were  the  prices  received  for  my  milk.  They  paid  all  other 
patrons  at  this  plant  at  the  same  price.  They  lease  this  plant  of 
us.  I  am  the  practical  owner  of  the  plant." 

Brown  &  Bailey,  Big  Flats,  Chemung  county,  1916 : 


April  

Per  100 
pounds 

$1  50 

May  .  . 

1  20 

**.l»J 

June  

1  15 

July  

1  40 

August  

1  56 

September 

1  65 

Mr.  Mindthorin  testifies :  "  The  Brown  &  Bailey  Company 
leased  this  plant  of  the  Chemung  Valley  Dairy  Products  Com- 
pany. That  was  a  dairymen's  concern.  When  the  Brown  & 
Bailey  Company  put  out  these  prices  a  lot  of  us  met  with  them. 
They  said  they  would  pay  us  more  if  they  could.  As  a  matter 
of  fact-,  they  did  advance  these  prices  as  follows: 

Per  100 
pounds 

April $1  30 

May 1  35 

June 1  25 

July 1  40 


We  had  no  written  contract. 


Sayre  Creamery  and  Cold  Storage  Company,  Sayre,  Pa.,  price 
paid  Mr.  Pem'bleton  of  Tioga  Center  for  separated  butter  fat, 
1916: 


April . 
May. 
June . 


199 

Mr.  Pembleton  testifies:  "I  have  on  an  average  from  3l/2  to 
4  pounds  of  butter  fat  in  every  100  pounds  of  milk.  I  keep  the 
skim  milk  and  use  it  for  stock  raising.  I  figure  the  skim  milk  is 
worth  25  cents  for  each  can  of  85  pounds  for  stock  and  hogs.  It 
is  worth  at  least  30  cents  a  can." 

During  the  same  period  the  Horseheads  Creamery  Company 
bought  cream  at  Horseheads,  K.  Y.,  in  the  adjoining  county  for 
29  cents  per  pound  of  butter  fat. 

F.  W.  Jansen  of  Hoboken.  Prices  at  Whitney's  Point,  JST.  Y., 
as  testified  to  by  George  II.  Graves  of  Whitney's  Point,  grade  A, 
raw,  shipped  direct  by  rail,  1916 : 

Per  can 
of  40 
quarts 

January $1  60 

February 1  55 

March 1  50 

April 1  23 

May 1  15 

June 97 

July 1  19 

August 1  33 

September 1  40 


(Minutes,  Volume  2,  page  985.) 

Clover-Dale    Company's   price   paid    Thomas    Gahagan,    1916, 
Binghamton : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  50 

May 1  20 

June 1  10 

July 1  30 

August T 1  80 

September 1  85 

October 1  95 

November 2  05 

December 2  05 

Broome  County  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Binghamton,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  90 

February 1  85 

March 1  75 

April 1  50 

May 1  10 

June 1  25 

July 1  65 

August 1  70 

September 1  70 

October 1  95 

November 2  05 

December 2  05 


200 

Mr.  Eldred  testifies  that  is  for  C  milk.  "  We  pay  10  cents  in- 
crease for  B  milk.  The  Binghamton  city  inspector  scores  the  barns. 
Our  milk  is  all  B  milk  except  from  three  farmers.  We  get  the  score 
sheets  from  the  city.  When  a  man  is  reported  to  us  as  making 
C  milk,  we  pay  him  10  cents  less  per  hundred  and  try  to  get  him 
to  fix  up  for  B  milk." 

Otto  Gruhn's  prices  at  Galena,  Chenango  county,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  74 

March 1  68 

April 1  46 

May 1  25 


(Minutes,  pages  1221-1224.) 

Prices  paid  by  the  Hosier  Ice  Cream  Company  of  Albany  to 
Brown  &  Bailey  per  can  of  40  quarts  of  40  per  cent  cream,  1916 : 

April..  $13  25 

May 12  75 

June 12  50 

July 12  75 

August 13  25 

September 13  50 

October 16  00 

November 16  00 

December 16  00 

Milk 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  80 

May 1  80 

June 1  80 

July 1  80 

August 1  80 

September 1  80 


And  from  October  to  March  following,  $2  per  hundredweight. 

Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company ;  prices  at  Stamford,. 
1ST.  Y.,  paid  to  Luther  H.  Hastings  of  the  town  of  Gilboa,  1916 : 

Price 

Test      per  cwt. 
January 4.33     $2  10| 


February 4 . 30 

March 4 . 43 

April 4.2 

May 4.2 

June 4.3 


99 

'.762 
41 

.42* 


Dairymen  were  charged  15  cents  per  40-quart  can  for  skimmed  milk. 
Above  prices  for  barn  scoring  68  and  up.    Ten  cents  less  for  lower  seore* 


201 

Charles  Rose,  Cobleskill,  E\  Y.  Mr.  Rose  operates  a  creamery 
at  or  near  Cobleskill,  Schoharie  county,  N.  Y.  Eight  patrons  drew 
milk  to  the  creamery.  Mr.  Rose  testifies :  "  I  paid  the  flat  Shef- 
field price  for  a  3.5  test;  Sheffield  flat  price;  took  the  milk  as  it 
was;  sold  back  skim  milk  at  15  cents  a  can.  Prices  as  follows : 

Per  cent. 

April $1  40 

May 1  40 

June.  .  1  30 


"  I  simply  weighed  the  milk  and  paid  them  according  to  the 
month  and  don't  make  any  test,  I  get  milk  by  auto  truck  also. 
Have  a  regular  route  that  the  auto  truck  travels.  The  farmers 
bring  all  milk  to  the  roadway  and  the  truck  picks  it  up.  I  take  22 
dairies  in  this  way.  I  buy  all  that  milk  per  40  quart  can  and  pay 
different  prices  in  different  months.  Prices  as  follows,  1916 : 


March 

Per  40 
quart  can 
$1  60 

April   

1  20 

May 

1  00 

June 

1  00 

July 

1  10 

August 

1  25 

September  .  . 

1  40 

"  When  I  get  the  milk  to  my  station,  I  ship  it  wherever  I  can 
sell  it.  In  June,  I  shipped  cream  to  a  man  at  Albany  named  Eddy 
who  furnishes  restaurants  in  Albany,  an  ice  cream  man.  I  sepa- 
rate it  and  make  the  skim  milk  into  pot  cheese.  In  June,  I  sold 
ten  cans  of  milk  to  Eddy  for  $1.50  per  can  of  40  quarts.  It  cost 
me  $1.10.  Cream  I  get  $13  a  40  quart  can  for,  in  June.  March, 
I  sold  milk  for  $1.55  per  can  to  the  Normanskill  Dairy  at  Albany. 
July,  I  sold  the  ^N~ormanskill  people  milk  at  $1.50  per  40  quart 
•can.  I  also  shipped  the  Norman-skill  people  a  can  of  skim  milk. 
In  January  I  sold  five  cans  of  cream  to  Brown  &  Bailey  of 
Canajoharie  at  $15  per  can  to  test  40  per  cent  butter  fat." 


202 


Borden  Branch,  Delhi,  N.  Y. 


Jan. 


June 


Jan. 
June 


Jan. 
June 


Jan. 
June 


( 

Contract 

Test       : 

Premium 

Price 

Amos  

6. 

.86 

$1  75 

Blake  

6. 

.46 

1  75 

Hoag  

5.4 

.62 

1  75 

1913 

Amos  

4.9 

.52 

1  00 

Blake  

5. 

.56 

1  00 

1914 

Amos  

6.1 

1.00 

1  75 

Amos  

5.1 

.60 

1  00 

1915 

Amos  

6.3 

1.00 

1  75 

Amos  

4.8 

1  44 

1916 

Amos  

51 

Amos  

4.7 

.  . 

52 
56 


2  75 
1  60 


2  75 


2  23 
1  51 


Prices  at  Black  River,  Jefferson  county. 

F.  F.  Hatch  of  New  York  city  buys  at  a  milk  station  at  Black 
River  in  Jefferson  county.  He  has  a  pasteurizing  plant  at  that  point. 
Receives  milk  from  22  dairies.  Mr.  Trenan,  the  manager,  testi- 
fied :  "  I  inspect  the  barn.  Mr.  Hatch  sends  the  score  cards  to  me 
from  New  York.  I  make  two  cards,  send  one  to  Mr.  Hatch  and 
keep  one.  I  have  been  inspecting  for  two  months,  and  before  that 
E.  W.  Haff  of  Adams  inspected  for  the  Board  of  Health  of  New 
York  city.  Ship  some  milk  to  Lamley  Dairy  Company  direct. 
We  bottle  milk." 


Prices  to  dairymen,  1916,  per  100  pounds. 

January $1 

February 
March .  . 
April  1-15 


April  16-30. 

May 

June 

July 


80 
70 
60 
50 
45 
30 
30 
40 


Mr.  Trenan. — "  We  sell  what  skim  milk  we  get  to  the  farmers  at 
10  cents  a  can.  We  dump  the  rest  of  it.  We  made  no  casein  or 
pot  cheese.  I  don't  keep  any  account  much  of  the  skim  milk." 


203 

Mutual  McDermott  prices,  Canton,  St.  Lawrence  county: 

1915 

December $1  50  for  3%  milk 

1916 

January $1  55  for  3%  milk 

February 1  55  for  3%  milk 

March 1  50  for  3%  milk 

April 1  40,  based  on  3.3%  milk 

May 1  15  for  3.3%  milk 

These  prices  were  increased  3  cents  per  hundredweight  for  each 
point  of  butter  fat. 

Tietjen  Brothers;  prices  at  Brushton,  Franklin  county,  1916; 
per  100  pounds,  without  butter  test : 

January $1  85 

February 1  75 

March t  60 

April 1  50 

May 1  30 

June 1  25 

July 1  35 

August 1  45 

Aubrey  Creek  Creamery  Company,  Dundee,  Quebec,  purchased 
by  the  Fort  Covington  Company.  Mr.  Chapman  testified :  "  Our 
milk  went  to  the  Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.  Then  we  or- 
ganized a  co-operative  company  and  the  Franklin  County  Cream- 
ery Company  could  not  get  what  they  required  in  our  vicinity. 
They  have  a  condensery  at  Fort  Covington.  Then  they  went  to 
the  Aubrey  Creek  Creamery  Company  at  Dundee,  Quebec.  That 
was  operated  by  a  Mr.  Curry  and  they  arranged  with  him  to  buy 
all  milk  that  came  into  that  place  at  $1.30  per  hundred  net,  and 
paid  Mr.  Curry  15  cents  per  hundred  for  taking  it  in  and  cooling 
it,  and  it  costs  5  cents  a  hundred  to  draw  it  to  Fort  Covington, 
X.  Y.  Their  price  for  May  milk  was  $1.20  per  hundredweight 
to  our  people  at  their  station  in  North  Bangor.  The  milk  from 
the  province  of  Quebec  did  not  go  to  North  Bangor,  but  to  Fort 
Covington,  and  they  had  to  pay  $2.50  a  day  for  a  consular  certi- 
ficate every  day  besides.  The  farmer  here  has  to  suffer  because 
of  a  lack  of  tariff  on  these  products.  The  Fort  Covington  Cream- 
ery Company  is  really  paying  a  higher  price  in  Canada  than  they 
are  here." 


204 


Comparison  of  prices  in  Franklin  county,  January,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  at  Bangor $175 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke 

Franklin  Creamery  Co.,  at  Fort  Covington 1  70 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 1  75 


1915 
August.          Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  Bangor. .  . . 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 

September.    Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  at  Bangor.. 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke „ 

Franklin  Creamery  Co.,  at  Fort  Covington . 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 

October.        Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  at  Bangor . 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke 

Franklin  Creamery  Co.,  at  Fort  Covington. 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 

November.    Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  at  Bangor . 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke 

Franklin  Creamery  Co.,  at  Fort  Covington . 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 

December.     Franklin  County  Creamery  Co.,  at  Bangor . 

Mutual  Cream  Co.,  at  Burke 

Franklin  Creamery  Co.,  at  Fort  Covington . 

Sheffield  Farms,  at  Malone 


25 
40 
40 
35 
50 
35 
50 
50 
70 
45 
75 
65 
85 
55 
85 
85 
85 
65 
85 


Seminole  Condensed  Milk  Company,  Holland  Patent,  prices, 
1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  75 

March 1  68 

April 1  45 


Prices  paid  Fred  Deck  of  Marcy  by  a  milk  distributor  in  the 
city  of  Utica,  1916,  $1.60  per  100  pounds,  average*,  throughout 
the  year. 

H.  T.  Martinson  of  New  York,  prices  paid  at  Holland  Patent, 
1916: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  95 

February 1  82 

March 1  64 

April 1  52 

May 1  27 

June  1  21 


(Minutes,  page  3541.) 


205 

Harlem  Dairy  Products  Company,  prices  at  Clinton,  N".  Y. : 

Per  cwt. 

1915.  October $1  75 

November 1  85 

December 1  85 

1916.  January 1  75 

February 1  75 

March 1  65 

April 1  45 

May .  . 25 

June 20 

July 35 

August 50 

September 60 

When  delivered  at  Clinton  station.  At  the  Paris  Hill  Creamery 
the  price  is  5  cents  per  100  pounds  less  than  the  Clinton  prices. 
The  Paris  Hill  station  milk  is  separated  and  manufactured  into 
cheese,  except  what  is  brought  to  Clinton. 

Levy  Dairy  Company,  prices  at  Bartlett,  N.  Y.,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  49 

May 1  24 

June 1  18 

July 1  34 

August 1  50 

Model  Dairy  Company,  Greenway,  1ST.  Y.,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  75 

March 1  65 

April 1  50 

May 1  40  cooled  50  degrees  or  below. 

1  30  otherwise. 
June 1  30  cooled  50  degrees  or  below, 

1  20  otherwise. 
July 1  40  cooled  50  degrees  or  below* 

1  30  otherwise. 

—      •          — - 

Mr.  Carver  testifies,  about  one-half  of  the  patrons  get  the  10 
cents  for  cooling. 

Dairymen's  Cheese  Factory  prices  in  Westmoreland,  Oneida 
county,  paid  Mr.  Fleming,  1916,  no  test: 


April.  . 
May.. . 
June. . . 


206 

Price   paid   by    Matti    Brothers'    Limburger    Cheese   Factory, 
Oneida  county,  N".  Y.,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  49 

May 1  34 

June . .  1  18 


Middle  States  Creamery  Company,  Canisteo,  !N".  Y.,  1916: 

Per 
40-quart  can 

January  1-15 SI  55 

January  16-31 1  50 

February 1  45 

March 1  40 

April 1  25 

May 1  15 

June 1  05 

July 1  15 

August 1  30 


Lloyd's  Dairy  Company,  Verona  Station;  prices,  1916: 

Per  cwt. 


February      .        

1  80 

March       .            

1  65 

April   

1  50 

May      

1  35 

June  

1  25 

July.  . 

1  40 

l^n  Vvnffpr  fat.  t.psf 

Levy  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Canisteo  Station : 


1915. 


1916. 


Per 

40-quart  can 

June  

$1  00 

July  

1  10 

August  

1  20 

September  

1  20 

October  

1  35 

November  

1  45 

December  

1  45 

January  

1  50 

February  

1  50 

March.  

1  45 

April  
May  .  .  .  .  :  

1  25 
1  15 

June  

1  05 

July  

1  15 

August  

1  30 

207 


Eeakes  Dairy  Company  at  Minetto,  prices. 
10  cents  less  for  lower  score;  1915 : 


Barn  score,  68; 


Per  cwt. 
1915.    January SI  75 


February  

1  65 

March  

1  60 

April  

1  45 

May  

1  30 

June  

1  30 

July  

1  30 

September  

1  45 

October  

1  60 

December  

1  80 

1916.    January  

1  80 

February  

1  80 

March  

1  75 

April  
May  

1  50 
1  35 

June  

1  35 

July  

1  40 

August  

1  55 

-    .  -     -•- 

Queen  City  Dairy  Company, 

Buffalo,  1915: 

Base  price  for 

Average 

3.8  milk 

price 

1915     October 

$1  75 

November  

1  90 

$1.798 

December  

1  95 

1.965 

1916.    January  

1  95 

1.941 

February  

75 

1.765 

March  

70 

1.638 

April  
May  

50,  3.5 
35 

milk          1.554 
1.388 

June  

25 

1.285 

July  

35 

1.384 

August  

50 

1.557 

September 

55 

. 

Merrell-Soule  Company,  prices  paid  at  Frewsberg,  Chautau- 
qua  county.  Three  cents  a  point  for  every  point  above  and  a 
reduction  of  3  cents  for  every  point  below  the  base  price;  10  centa 
additional  for  68  barn  score: 

Per  cwt. 
1915.    September $1  35  for  3.6  milk 


October 

November 

December 

1916.    January 

February  1-22. . . 
February  22-28. . 

March 

April 


1  60  for  4.  milk 
1  60  for  4.  milk 
1  70  for  4.  milk 
1  70  for  4.  milk 
1  70  for  4  milk 
1  60  for  3.8  base 
1  60  for  3.8  base 
1  45  for  3.5  base 


May 1  25  for  3.5  base 


208 

Per  cwt. 

1915.    June $1  25  for  3.5  base 

July 1  25  for  3.5  base 

August  1-15 1  40  for  3.5  base 

August  16-31 1  50  for  3.5  base 

September 1  65  for  3.8  base 

October 1  90  for  4.  base 


Mr.  Beardsley,  superintendent,  testified :  "  Our  April  price 
was  $1.45  for  3.5  milk  delivered  at  the  plant.  Barn  score  below 
68.  3.5  base  with  3  cents  added  or  deducted  for  each  point  above 
or  below  butter  fat  test.  Borden's  price  for  April  was  $1.45  for 
3.5  milk,  B  grade.  We  paid  $1.55  for  B  grade  and  $1.45  for 
C  grade.  We  are  in  the  33  cent  freight  zone.  I  would  not  say 
because  we  do  not  ship  any  liquid  milk.  In  May,  we  paid  $1.25 
for  3.5  milk,  C  grade.  In  June,  we  paid  $1.25  for  C  grade,  and 
$1.35  for  B  grade.  In  July,  we  paid  the  same  price  as  June. 
This  Borden  price  is  the  published  price.  I  understand  they 
added  to  it.  In  August,  we  paid  $1.40  for  the  first  15  days,  and 
$1.50  for  the  next  sixteen  days.  Where  the  score  was  68,  we 
paid  $1.50  and  $1.60.  In  September,  our  price  was  $1.65  for  3.8 
C  grade;  $1.75  for  B  grade,  3.8  basis.  In  October,  our  price  was 
$1.90  for  4  per  cent  milk,  C  grade,  $2  for  4  per  cent  milk  B  grade. 
A  man  delivering  us  4.4  milk  in  October,  B  grade,  will  get  $2.12. 
4.5  milk  same  grade  $2.15.  The  1st  of  September,  1915,  we  start- 
ed the  barn  score  system.  Before  that,  it  was  on  the  butter  f«t 
basis.  Most  of  our  milk  was  C  grade  before  that.  Our  object  in 
establishing  the  B  grade  was  to  get  into  New  York  City  with  our 
produce,  if  we  wanted  to  ship  any  excess.  Up  to  that  time  we  were 
never  under  New  York  City  Board  of  Health  regulations.  We  do 
not  have  to  score  more  than  40  to  get  into  New  York,  but  in  order 
to  get  the  better  conditions  and  to  be  able  to  get.  nearer  the  B  grade 
product,  we  gave  the  10  per  cent,  premium  for  all  milk  that  scored 
68.  We  make  milk  powder.  The  better  the  milk,  the  better  the 
keeping  qualities." 

Mohawk  Condensery  Company  prices  at  Sherman,  Chautauqua 
county,  N.  Y.,  4  per  cent  base,  3  cents  a  point  for  each  point  above 
or  below  4.  Not  scored. 


1 

a 


209 

4  per  cent 
Per  cwt.  milk  test 

May $1  45        4.1 

June 145        4.1 

July 145        4.2 

August 1  60        4.3 

September 1  80         

Test  of  the  Enos  Dairy  at  this  plant.     (Minutes,  page  6914.) 

Mr.  Enos,  a  patron,  testified :  "The  average  test  in  1915  for  five 
months  of  the  dairies  that  went  to  this  plant  was  3.7.  Some  of  the 
milk  is  shipped  to  Philadelphia.  Most  of  it  is  condensed.  Chau- 
tauqua  county  milk  can  get  to  Philadelphia,  but  not  into  New 
York  under  present  conditions  of  traffic.  Philadelphia  milk  dis- 
tributors have  collecting  plants  at  Mayville,  Hartfield  stations  and 
Summerdale.  The  Philadelphia  Health  Department  does  not: 
carry  on  any  inspection.  The  Supplee  Company  is  a  Philadelphia . 
milk  concern  in  this  territory.  When  we  were  making  prices  with 
the  Mohawk  people,  the  superintendent  of  the  Mohawk  Factory 
informed  us  that  there  was  no  use  of  our  taking  up  the  price  ques- 
tion with  the  Supplee  people;  that  the  Mohawk  Condensed  Milk 
Company  established  the  price,  and  what  they  paid  the  Supplee 
Company  would  pay.  E.  J.  Ballinger  of  Sherman  told  me  that, 
he  had  an  arrangement  to  that  effect  with  the  Supplee  people.  He 
said  the  Supplee  people  phoned  over  and  asked  what  price  they 
were  to  pay  for  the  ensuing  month  before  they  put  out  the  price 
list.  The  Supplee  people  have  stations  at  Hartfield  and  Summer- 
dale.  They  go  under  the  name  of  the  Supplee-Alderney  Dairy 
Company  and  are  located  in  Philadelphia.  The  Philadelphia 
milk  train  leaves  there  in  the  afternoon  between  three  and  four 
o'clock  and  the  train  will  reach  Philadelphia  the  next  morning  for 
distribution." 

Harold  S.  King  of  Machias,  testified:  "  I  formerly  shipped  our 
milk  as  baggage  to  dealers  in  Buffalo.  We  received  32,  14  and  15 
cents  per  gallon.  The  retail  price  of  milk  in  Buffalo  was  7  cents 
per  quart.  In  that  Spring  they  raised  the  price  in  Buffalo  to  8 
cents  per  quart.  The  dairymen  were  inclined  to  think  we  ought 
to  have  some  part  of  the  increase,  but  they  put  the  price  down  in- 
stead of  raising  it  so  we  got  11,  13  and  15  cents  a  gallon  and  15 
cents  only  the  last  two  months  instead  of  four,  but  the  company 
went  into  bankruptcy  and  is  now  re-organized.  We  do  not  ship  to* 


210 

Buffalo  any  more.  We  undertook  to  find  other  companies.  There 
were  at  that  time  the  Queen  City  and  the  People's  Milk  Company, 
but  when  we  undertook  to  correspond  with  them,  they  told  us  they 
had  decided  not  to  buy  any  milk  south  of  Arcadia ;  that  our  terri- 
tory was  well  looked  after  by  the  Queen  City  and  the  milk  train 
was  gone.  The  Pennsylvania  Bailroad  had  taken  the  milk  train 
off.  The  Merrell-Soule  people  have  a  plant  at  Arcadia  and  they 
are  generally  considered  hereabouts  a  little  lower  than  the  Bordens. 
The  best  price  that  we  ever  had  was  at  Buffalo.  The  milk  com- 
panies put  their  price  just  a  little  bit  higher  than  you  can  get  at 
the  cheese  factory.  The  Queen  City  prices  in  six  months  averaged 
2%  cents  less  than  the  Sheffield  plant,  Sheffield  Farms  paid  us, 

1915,  October,  $1.80;  November,  $1.90,  and  December,   $1.90 

1916,  January,   $1.80;  February,  $1.75;   March,   $1.60.      They 
offered  25  cents  advance  in  October,  1916." 

Hornell  Sanitary  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Greenwood  station, 
Steuben  county.    Barn  score,  68,;  10  cents  less  for  C  milk;  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  60 

May 1  40 

June 1  25 

July 

September 1  65 


Highest  price  winter  of  1915-16,  $1.80. 
Newark  Milk  and  Cream  Company  prices  at  Canisteo,  1916  : 

Per  cwt  Test 

January $1  70  3.4 

February 1  60  3.8 

March 1  60  4.6 

April 1  35  3.4 

June 1  20     

July 1  30     

August '. 1  50     

September 1  70     

The  above  prices  paid  Potter  Brothers. 

George  H.  Crandall,  dairyman,  near  Hornell,  testifies  that  he 
sells  his  milk  at  4  cents  a  quart  the  year  round  to  milk  sellers  in 
the  city. 

Hoag  Cheese  Factory  prices  at  Varysburg,  Wyoming  county,, 
1916: 

Per  cwt. 

September SI  75 

October .  .  2  10 


211 

Alexander    Campbell    Company's   prices    at   Lowville   station,, 
1916,  B  milk: 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  81 

February ' 1  76 

March 1  71 

April 1  50 

May 1  40 

June 1  30 

July 1  40 

August 1  50 

September 1  70 


Henry  Arnstein's  prices,  Lyons  Falls  station,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

January $1  80 

February 1  80 

March 1  65 

April 1  50 

May 1  40 

June 1  30 

July 1  40 

H.  T.  Miehelson's  prices  at  the  Holland  Patent  Milk  and  Cream 
station,  Holland  Patent,  N.  Y. ;  no  butter  test,  B  milk,  1915 : 

Per  cwt. 

1915.  November $2  00 

December 2  00 

1916.  January 1  95 


February 
March 
April.. 
May.  . 
June . . 
July.. 
August . 


82 
68 
52 
27 
21 
37 
60 


September 1  76 

Henry  Arnstein's  prices  at  Remsen  Milk  and  Cream  Company 
station,  Eemsen,  N.  Y.,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 
April..  $1  45 


May 

June 

July... 

August 

September 


35 
20 
35 
50 
65 

October 2  05 

November .  .  


No  butter  fat  test. 


212 

Roger  Station,  near  Boonville,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  40 

May 1  35 

June 1  30 

July 1  35 

August 1  50 

September 1  65 


Empire  State  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Dolgeville,  N.  Y.,  1915;? 

Per  cwt. 

October $1  75 

November 1  85 

December 1  85 

1916.   January 1  75 

February 1  70 

March 1  60 

April 1  40 

May 1  10 

June 1  10 

July 1  30 

August 1  45 

September 1  45 


(Note. —  Flat  price  based  on  0.8  milk.  Three  cents  per  100  pounds  added  or 
deducted  for  each  point  up  or  down.  Ten  cents  additional  for  barns  scoring  68. 

Mr.  Wheeler,  station  agent,  testified:  "In  August  the  com- 
pany wanted  more  milk  and  we  bought  milk  from  the  Burrell 
Cheese  Factory,  five  miles  from  Dolgeville.  It  was  weighed  at 
the  factory  and  brought  to  us.  Cheese  was  high  and  we  had  to- 
pay  a  good  price,  $1.55  at  the  factory,  and  our  company  drew  it 
down." 

Max  Blum  prices  at  the  Middleville  Cream  Company's  Co- 
operative station.  Leased.  No  butter  fat  test.  Flat  price.  1915  ; 

Per  cwt. 

1915.  April $1  55 

May 1  40 

June 1  30 

July... 1  40 

August 1  60 

September 1  70 

October 1  90 

November 2  00 

December 2  10 

1916.  January 2  00 

February 1  90 

March .  .  1  70 


213 

Modern  Dairy  Company  prices  at  St.  Johnsville  Co-operative 
plant.  Leased.  1916: 

Per  cwt. 

April..  $1  55 

May 1  30 

June 1  20 

July 1  45 

August 1  56 

September 1  65 

The  contract  for  the  remainder  of  the  year  was  as  follows : 

November $2  05 

December 2  05 

January 2  00 

February 1  95 

March 1  85 

Fort  Plain  Milk  Company.  John  tSalzman,  called,  testified: 
"  I  live  in  Fort  Plain;  I  am  looking  after  all  Fort  Plain  Milk 
Company's  business.  It  is  a  co-operative  corporation.  We  select 
the  milk  ourselves,  send  it  to  different  places;  we  send  some  to 
Schenectady  and  to  Williams  in  Albany.  We  have  capital  stock 
paid  in  of  $17,000.  We  have  seven  plants.  All  the  stockholders 
were  dairymen.  We  have  seven  directors  and  about  160  patrons. 
The  patrons  are  not  all  stockholders.  We  have  about  130  or  140 
stockholders.  One  plant  at  Glover,  one  at  Brookman's  Corners, 
one  at  Sprout  Brook  and  one  at  Stone  Arabia.  In  the  Spring  of 
the  year,  we  put  out  a  price  for  six  months  that  we  pay  the  stock- 
holders  and  everybody  else.  We  are  not  running  it  as  a  co-opera- 
tive plant,  but  buying  it  flat.  The  milk  belongs  to  the  company. 
At  country  stations  it  was  10  cents  less  than  Fort  Plain  prices,  as 
shown  on  the  card.  We  have  made  a  little  money  all  along.  We 
pay  the  patrons  all  alike,  but  the  dairyman  who  hold  stock  has  had 
6  per  cent  on  his  money  right  along.  We  never  declared  more 
than  6  per  cent.  We  have  got  quite  a  little  surplus  on  our  books. 
We  paid  all  our  debts  for  last  year,  $5,000  last  fall  and  $5,000  in 
August.  We  made  it  out  of  this  milk. 

Mr.  Ward. — It  suggests  itself  to  us  that  this  might  be  a  means 
of  seriously  hurting  the  tenant  farmer.  There  has  been  some  sug- 
gestion made  to  the  Committee  that  the  operations  of  your  com- 
pany where  the  owners  of  the  farm  owned  the  stock  and  the  tenant 
did  not,  were  to  the  detriment  of  the  tenant  farmer. 


214 

Mr.  Salzman. — The  Farm  Bureau  people  have  been  looking  into 
fchat  and  after  they  understood  it,  they  felt  a  good  deal  better 
about  it.  Our  debt  is  paid  now  and  we  propose  in  the  future  to 
give  them  all  there  is  in  it  and  just  take  the  dividends  on  the  in- 
vestment. In  August,  we  sold  Brown  &  Bailey  40  cans  for  $67.50 
and  45  cans  for  $74.25.  The  difference  in  price  is  made  when  we 
deliver  it  and  when  they  drew  it.  The  $67.50  is  for  cans  they 
drew  from  the  station  at  Fort  Plain.  They  came  to  the  station 
and  got  45  cans  which  were  invoiced  to  them  at  $67.50.  We  also 
drew  45  cans  to  them  ourselves  from  Stone  Arabia.  We  had  no 
contract  with  Brown  &  Bailey.  When  they  needed  some,  they  got 
it.  They  paid  so  much  a  can.  That  is,  they  were  paying  us  nearly 
$2  per  100  pounds  then  for  milk.  We  sold  the  skim  milk  to  Max 
Blum  to  make  bakers'  cheese.  We  make  the  cheese  for  him.  We 
sold  him  5,500  pounds  of  skim  milk  for  $13.75  in  August.  Au- 
gust 31st  we  sold  Jetter  60  cans  of  milk  for  $96  f.  o.  b.  Fort 
Plain.  Two  cans  of  40  per  cent  cream,  $30  each;  2  cans  of  20 
per  cent,  cream,  $15.  On  September  2nd  we  sold  50  cans  of  milk 
to  the  Modern  Dairy  Company  for  $85. 

Mr.  Ward. — If  you  have  made  these  profits  in  your  company, 
$5,000  a  year,  say,  I  don't  see  why  part  of  that  has  not  come  out 
of  the  tenant  farm. 

Mr.  Salzman. — Why  it  certainly  has,  and  it  comes  out  of  all  of 
them,  but  if  they  have  stock  in  it  I  don't  see  as  it  is  any  different. 
We  put  the  money  into  the  treasury  of  the  company  and  it  is  the 
stockholders'  money  and  their  stock  is  worth  so  much  more.  The 
stockholders  have  had  the  benefit  before,  but  after  this  the  tenants 
will,  too.  Our  prices  for  September  are  $1.60  per  100  pounds. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And  you  are  really  getting  about  $2  from  Brown 
&  Bailey. 

Mr.  Salzman. —  Well,  pretty  near  that,  I  guess. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Of  course,  these  farms  are  largely  occupied  by 
tenant  farmers  on  shares. 

Mr.  Salzman. —  There  are  quite  a  few. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And  if  this  practice  persisted  long  enough  it  would 
make  every  tenant  farmer  avoid  the  neighborhood,  would  it  not  ? 


215 

Mr.  Salzman. —  No,  sir;  oh,  no;  our  debt  is  paid  now.  From 
now  on  they  share  in  with  the  rest. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  mean  you  are  not  going  to  try  to  make  large 
profits  any  longer  ? 

Mr.  Salzman. —  Our  debt  is  paid. 
Mr.  Ward.—  What  ? 

Mr.  Salzman. —  Our  debt  is  paid.  We  don't  owe  anyone  any 
money.  We  will  put  in  the  price  next  month  of  $2.10  and  the 
tenant,  gets  just  as  much  as  the  man  who  owns  the  farm. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Your  July  price  was  $1.20  per  100  pounds  flat. 
Borden's  July  price  was  $1.25  per  100  pounds  for  3.3  milk.  Your 
June  price  was  $1.05  per  100  pounds,  and  Borden's  June  price 
was  paid  at  $1.09.  Your  price  for  May  was  $1.10,  and  Borden's 
price  for  B  milk  3.3  was  $1.15.  Your  price  for  April  was  $1.30 
for  100  pounds  and  Borden's  price  was  $1.40  per  too  pounds. 

Mr.  Salzman. —  Yes.  I  was  selling  our  milk  to  Brown  &  Bailey 
at  Canajoharie.  They  take  all  of  our  surplus.  They  are  to  give 
us  $2.10  per  40-quart  can  through  October.  I  have  had  no  talk  with 
them  about  what  they  should  pay  for  November  or  December. 
When  we  started  our  company  owed  $10,000  and  we  put  in  $5,000 
for  repairs.  We  paid  the  $10,000  mortgage  and  all  our  debts. 
We  made  $10,000  on  $18,000  of  stock.  We  handle  a  lot  of  milk." 

Central  Dairy  Company's  prices  at  Randall,  Montgomery 
county,  1915: 

Per  cwt. 

October $1  55 

November 1  70 

December 1  70 

1916.    January 1  80 

February 1  70 

March 1  60 

April 1  40 

May 1  30 

June 1  20 

July 1  30 

August 1  45 

September 1  60 


216 

Prices  paid  by  Charles  M.  Smith  at  Fort  Plain,  N.  Y.,  1915 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  25 

May 1  00 

June 1  00 

July 1  00 

August 1  25 

September 1  35 

October 1  75 

November 1  80 

December 1  80 

1916.    January 1  80 

February 1  70 

March 1  60 

April 1  30 

May 1  10 

June 1  05 

July 1  20 

August 1  50 

September 1  60 


LaGrange  Creamery  Association,  Poughkeepsie,  !N".  Y.,  butter 
t  nrices.  1916: 


fat  prices,  1916 : 


April 37  cents  per  pound 

May 33  cents  per  pound 

June 32  cents  per  pound 

July 33  cents  per  pound 

August 34  cents  per  pound 

September 35  cents  per  pound 

October 37  cents  per  pound 

Locust  Farms  Company  prices  at  Verbank  shipping  station, 
Dutchess  county,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $2  06 

May 181 

June , 1  75 

July 1  96 

August 2  12 

September 

These  prices  are  for  5  per  cent  milk.  Mr.  Olmsted  testifies:  ''Three  cents 
is  taken  off  these  prices  for  each  point  below  5  per  cent  butter  fat.  Most  of 
our  dairies  average  3.6  and  3.8  per  cent.  The  barns  are  scored.  No  C  milk." 

Mutual  McDermott  Dairy   Corporation   prices   at   Millbrook, 
Dutchess  county,  K  Y.,  for  3.3  milk,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  40 

May 115 

June 1  09 

July 1  35 

August 1  51 

September 1  60 


21Y 

Albert  C.  Ogden,  retail  milk  dealer  in  Middletown,  prices  paid 
dairymen,  1916 : 

Per  cwt. 

April $1  70 

May 1  40 

June 1  25 

July 1  60 

August 1  76 

September 1  85 

Price  based  on  3.8  per  cent  milk.  Three  cents  deducted  or  added  for  each 
point  of  butter  fat  above  3.8  per  cent. 

Levy  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Edmeston,  1916 : 

Per  cent 

April $1  39 

May 1  14 

June 1  08 

July 1  34 

August 1  50 

September 1  59 


Ten  cents  added  for  the  first  three  months. 

Standard  Dairy  Company  prices,  Moravia,  Cayuga  county, 
K  Y.,  1916: 

Per  40 
quart  can 

January $1  50 

February 1  45 

March 1  40 

April 1  25 

May 1  10 

June 1  05 

July 1  15 

August 1  28 

September 1  40 

Brighton  'Place   Dairy  'Company  prices   at   Metcalfe,   ~N.   Y. 
R.  S.  COGSWELL,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified ; 

"  I  am  manager  of  the  Brighton  Place  Dairy  Company's  milk 
and  cream  plant  at  Metcalfe.  Metcalfe  is  about  ten  miles  from 
Oswego.  We  have  an  established  price  that  we  pay  on  contract. 
We  got  about  150  dairies.  We  pay  the  same  price  to  all.  We  are 
paying  a  higher  price  per  100  pounds  during  the  winter  months, 
but  at  the  same  time  we  paid  the  higher  price  we  raised  the  test. 
Prices,  1916  :  April,  $1.60  per  hundredweight,  3.8  per  cent,  butter 
fat;  May,  $1.30,  3.8  per  cent.  We  had  to  pay  the  transportation 
on  the  goods  at  Metcalfe  and  at  Rochester  it  was  delivered  f .  o.  b. 


218 

In  May,  at  the  Brighton  plant,  we  paid  $1.36  per  100  pounds  of 
3.8  milk  with  a  deduction  of  three  cents  for  each  point  below  3.8. 
The  May  price  at  Metcalfe  was  $1.25  per  hundredweight  of  3.6 
butter  fat. 

Mr.  Ward. —  If  we  take  oif  three  points  from  the  3.8  we  take 
off  six  cents 

Mr.  Cogswell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  brings  the  Brighton  price  of  $1.30  down  to 
$1.24? 

Mr.  Cogswell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.— While  in  Metcalfe  you  paid  $1.25  for  3.6  milk, 
which  was  one  cent  more  than  you  were  paying  for  3.6  milk  in 
Rochester. 

Mr.  Cogswell.—  That  is  right.  That  left  3.6  milk  at  Brighton 
$1.24  for  May,  and  3.6  milk  at  Metcalfe  $1.25  for  May.  Our 
October  price  for  3.8  milk  at  Metcalfe  is  $2,  and  our  October 
price  at  Brighton  is  $2.15  for  4.0  milk;  and  our  October  price  at 
Metcalfe  is  $2  for  3.8  milk. 

Bifij  Elm  Dairy  Company  prices  at  Avon,  Monroe  county,  $1.86 
per  100  pounds  f.  o.  b.  Rochester,  throughout  the  year. 

Prices  received  by  Frank  D.  Cullinan,  dairyman  at  Avon,  from 
Rochester  milk  dealers.  Mr.  Cullinan  testified : 

"  I  sell  my  milk  by  the  year,  ship  it  to  peddlers  in  Rochester. 
Four  cents  for  six  months  and  four  and  one-half  cents  for  six 
months.  I  have  to  pay  the  freight  to  Rochester;  it  costs  about 
one  and  one-half  cents  a  gallon." 

McLaury  Farm  prices,  Otsego  county. 

CHARLES  D.  McLAURY,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  We  have  got  2,980  acres  of  land  between  Milford  and  Oneonta 
on  the  Susquehanna  river,  and  between  three  and  four  hundred 
cows.  We  have  a  milk  station  on  the  farm.  We  only  ship  our  own 
milk  from  our  own  station ;  we  do  not  buy  any.  We  sell  our  milk 
to  the  Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company.  We  have  some 
registered  cattle,  but  principally  grades.  Had  all  thoroughbreds 


219 

once,  but  don't  have  so  many  now.  We  have  been  selling  our  milk 
for  eight  years,  shipping  direct.  Our  farms  are  operated  in  ten 
parcels.  We  do  not  use  the  tenant  system ;  we  hire  the  help  and 
work  them  ourselves.  My  son  and  brother  and  I  are  in  partner- 
ship. We  have  a  central  receiving  station  on  farm  No.  2,  half 
way  between  Milf  ord  and  Portlandville ;  we  built  it  ourselves ;  we 
have  a  separator  in  there  and  can  make  cheese  or  butter.  The 
station  cost  to  build  and  equip  about  $2,000.  It  has  been  inspected 
and  certified  by  the  Board  of  Health  of  the  City  of  'New  York. 
They  gave  us  95  per  cent,  score  last  time  on  barns,  equipment  and 
everything.  We  have  no  written  contract  with  the  Sheffield  Farms 
people.  We  just  send  them  down  the  milk  and  every  30  days  they 
send  us  a  check  for  it.  I  don't  know  what  we  are  going  to  get 
for  our  milk  this  month.  We  ship  it  in  40-quart  cans.  We  cool 
it  down  to  45.  It  is  brought  from  the  farms  at  50.  Then  we  put 
it  in  the  cans  and  ship  it  to  New  York.  I  don't  know  what  the 
Sheffield  Farms  are  doing  with  our  milk  now,  but  they  at  one  time 
had  a  contract  with  one  or  two  hospitals  in  New  York  and  it  went 
direct  to  those  hospitals.  The  hospitals  sent  their  doctors  up  he-re 
and  went  through  our  plant  and  had  our  cows  tested  and  so  on, 
before  they  accepted  it.  All  our  cows  on  these  ten  farms  have  been 
tubercular  tested.  We  are  selling  our  milk  for  grade  B ;  we  don't 
call  it  certified  milk. 

"  Our  milk  averaged  $1.75  a  hundred  pounds  for  the  first  seven 
months  of  this  year.  That  was  January  to  July.  We  have  no 
contract  now.  The  first  two  or  three  years  we  did  business  with 
them  we  had  a  verbal  agreement.  We  got  fifteen  cents  a  hundred- 
weight above  the  New  York  Milk  Exchange  quotations.  We  ship 
all  the  year  'round. 

"  Of  course,  we  have  to  pay  all  the  expense  of  maintaining  this 
shipping  station  and  the  help  in  it  so  that  the  price  we  receive  for 
our  milk  is  f.  o.  b.  the  cars  at  the  station  in  shape  acceptable  to 
the  New  York  health  authorities.  The  $1.75  under  that  situation 
is  not  high ;  it  is  low.  However,  we  are  satisfied  with  that  price. 
If  we  were  not,  we  would  not  accept  it.  They  furnish  the  cans. 
We  have  never  had  a  can  of  milk  condemned  nor  a  can  thrown 
out  since  we  shipped  to  New  York.  We  shipped  to  Washington 
quite  a  little  while  but  we  find  New  York  a  more  satisfactory 


220 

market.  We  get  our  pay  regularly  and  we  are  satisfied  with  it. 
The  highest  we  shipped  in  the  seven  months  was  90  cans,  and  the 
lowest  55  cans  per  day.  I  can  tell  you  what  our  checks  came  to 
for  the  seven  months. 

January $2,725  00 

February 2,476  00 

March 3,104  00 

April 3,519  00 

May 3,509  00 

June 3 ,239  00 

July 2,891  00 

The  station  labor  is  fairly  charged  at  $40  a  month,  besides  the  board. 

"  We  run  a  store  and  buy  our  stuff  at  wholesale  and  I  figure  at 
wholesale  prices  it  costs  me  about  $1.97  a  week  for  board  per  head. 
That  is  the  actual  cost  of  food.  The  labor  of  a  man  and  his  wife  is 
not  included  or  lodging.  Probably  that  should  be  figured  at  $15 
a  month,  so  that  the  labor  would  cost  us,  in  the  station,  $68  a 
month.  That  should  be  taken  out  of  the  receipts  to  cover  station 
labor.  I  know  what  I  paid  out  for  labor  for  that  milk,  as  follows : 

January $840  00 

February 890  00 

March 990  00 

April 1,090  00 

May 1,090  00 

June 1,090  00 

July 1,270  00 

August 1 , 160  00 

Grain 

January $682  10 

January 265  90 

January 265  07 

February 692  50 

February 605  00 

March 141  00 

March 64  00 

April 162  00 

April 668  50 

April 277  00 

May 736  00 

May 200  00 

June 713  00 

June 162  00 

July 572  00 

Our  investment,  land,  equipment  and  stock  will  be  worth  $90,000. 

"  The  fertilization  by  manure  will  just  about  pay  for  deprecia- 
tion of  buildings  and  farm.  We  do  not  figure  our  labor  in  the 
labor  cost.  We  didn't  pay  any  income  tax  in  1915;  we  didn't 
show  up  enough  so  we  had  to  pay  any  tax." 


221 

One  Farmers  Views 

Mr.  McLaury. —  I  will  tell  you  what  I  think  if  you  want  me 
to  tell  you.  The  State  sent  out  men  a  few  months  ago  and  I  went 
myself  some  of  the  time  to  try  to  tell  the  people  how  to  get  $2  for 
$1  and  how  they  could  grow  two  blades  of  grass  where  they  were 
growing  one,  and  how  they  could  get  two  ears  of  corn  where  they 
were  getting  one,  and  they  knew  all  that  before,  but  if  the  State 
had  sent  out  men  telling  them  where  they  could  sell  their  products 
to  better  advantage  instead  of  trying  to  teach  them  to  raise  so  much 
that  they  couldn't  sell,  it  would  have  been  a  great  deal  better  for 
the  farmer,  and  if  this  Committee  now  can  tell  us  as  farmers 
how  we  can  dispose  of  our  product  to  better  advantage,  we  will  be 
very  much  pleased  and  thank  you  very  much,  and  are  willing  to 
pay  something. 

Now,  I  want  to  say  something  further.  The  great  trouble  is, 
everybody  else  has  got  a  commission.  The  railroad  has  got  a  com- 
mission and  they  go  on  and  figure  up  so  much  for  equipment,  wear 
and  tear  and  expense  and  labor,  and  then  they  say,  you  can  raise 
your  freight  tariff  to  such  a  price  in  order  to  make  a  profit.  The 
farmer  hasn't  any  commission.  If  you  will  appoint  a  commission 
to  handle  the  milk  product  for  us  farmers  and  fix  the  price  so  we 
can  make  a  profit  the  same  as  other  corporations,  we  will  be  satis- 
fied and  you  will  be  doing  us  a  great  favor.  We  will  appreciate 
that.  We  will  raise  the  products  for  you.  You  haven't  got  to  tell 
us  how  to  grow  corn  or  grow  oats  or  make  milk ;  we  know  how  to 
begin  with.  We  have  been  at  it  from  the  cradle  up  and  that  is 
where  the  State  is  on  the  wrong  end  of  it.  If  you  will  tell  us 
what  to  do  with  the  stuff  we  raise,  that  is  where  we  are  up  against 
it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  you  consider  the  problem  one  of  marketing  ? 
Mr.  McLaury. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  think,  perhaps,  this  Committee  has  reached  the 
same  conclusion  that  the  remedy  must  come  through  more  efficient 
and  more  economical  methods  of  marketing.  Of  course,  it  is  of 
advantage  to  the  State  to  have  an  abundant  supply  of  milk  at  a 
reasonable  price  within  the  reach  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  cities 
and  country,  too. 


222 

Mr.  McLaury. —  Our  farms  are  producing  too  much.  We  are- 
making  too  much  milk.  Consequently,  we  have  to  have  a  bigger 
outlet  for  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Milk  is  scarce  to-day. 

Mr.  McLaury.  — Then  make  a  commission  and  fix  the  price. 
If  it  is  scarce  we  are  certainly  entitled  to  the  advantage  of  that 
market. 

Then  if  you  you  will  educate  the  farmers  so  that  they  can 
organize,  form  organizations  like  the  Grange,  and  buy  the  feed  as 
cheap  as  any  other  man. 

Phoenix  Cheese  Company  prices  at  West  Exeter,  Otsego  county, 
N".  Y.,  manufacturers  of  limburger  cheese,  Swiss  cheese,  neuf- 
chatel  cheese,  pot  cheese  and  Gouda  cheese.  W.  Frank  Stewart 
testified : 

"  Gouda  cheese  is  not  quite  so  hard  at  Edam ;  weighs  seven  or 
eight  pounds,  made  of  whole  milk ;  takes  about  twelve  pounds  of 
milk  to  make  a  pound  of  Gouda  cheese.  Ours  are  shipped  to  ISFew 
York  and  from  there  to  South  Africa.  It  takes  from  seven  to  eight 
pounds  of  milk  to  make  a  pound  of  limburger.  It  may  run  as  high 
as  ten  pounds.  It  takes  fourteen  to  sixteen  pounds  of  milk  to  make 
a  pound  of  Swiss  cheese.  We  buy  by  the  hundred.  Our  prices 
were  as  follows,  we  make  the  price  the  first  of  the  month  and  post 
it  in  the  factory: 

Per  cwt 

1916.   April $1  45 

May 1  20 

June 1  20 

July 1  25 

August 

September 

"  that  is  a  flat  price  without  any  butter  fat  test  or  dairy  score. 
This  price  is  for  milk  delivered  at  the  station." 

COMPARATIVE  PRICES 

Merrell-Soule  Company's  prices  for  five  years  at  Arcade,  Wyom- 
ing county,  and  Frewsburg,  Cattaraugus  county : 


223 


MERRELL-SOULE  CO. 

Manufacturers  of  Food  Products 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

We  give  you  below  the  prices  paid  by  our  Company  for  the  last  five  years  to 
the  farmers  from  whom  we  purchased  milk  in  the  State  of  New  York.  These 
prices  are  the  prices  actually  returned  to  the  farmers  regardless  of  whether 
the  milk  was  delivered  at  our  plant  by  them,  or  whether  it  was  hauled  in  by 
our  own  teams.  As  near  as  we  can  figure  98  per  cent,  of  the  milk  was  hauled 
in  by  our  teams  and  15  cents  cwt.  would  be  a  fair  estimate  of  the  cost  of 
hauling.  Therefore,  considering  the  milk  as  delivered  by  the  farmers  15  cents 
should  be  added  to  the  prices  given  below. 

In  June,  1915,  we  began  paying  a  premium  of  10  cents  cwt.  for  milk  from 
barns  scoring  68  or  better.  This  premium  is  included  in  the  average  prices 
given  below.  At  two  of  our  plants  we  were,  during  practically  this  entire 
period,  purchasing  the  milk  on  a  flat  basis  and  at  two  on  a  butterfat  basis. 
The  figures  given  below  are  the  actual  prices  paid  for  the  milk,  although  at 
plants  where  we  were  buying  on  a  butterfat  basis  some  of  the  the  farmers,  of 
course,  got  less  and  others  more  than  the  prices  stated. 

We  trust  that  these  figures  are  the  figures  you  desire  for  your  report. 


anuary  

1912 
$1.70 

1913 
$1.797 

1914 
$1.743 

1915 
$1.70 

1916 
$1.75 

ebruary  .... 

March  
April  

1.60 

1.345 
1.30 

1.70 

1.496 
1.354 

1.50 

1.40 
1.195 

1.60 

1.457 
1  25 

1.75 
1.65 
1.626 
1.476 

Jan.  31  to  Feb.  20 
Feb.  21  to  Feb.  28 

May 

1  143 

1  176 

1  093 

1  25 

1  226 

June 

1  00 

1  154 

1  05 

1  29 

1  228 

July. 

1  20 

1  255 

1  20 

1  301 

1  229 

August  
September  .  .  . 
October  
November  .  .  . 
December.  .  .  . 

1.299 
1.403 
1.55 
1.774 
1.812 

1.304 
1.458 
1.66 
1.814 

1.827 

1.248 
1.45 
1.603 
1.705 
1.708 

1.316 
1.311 
1.62 
1.624 
1.724 

1.431 
1.50 
2.241 
2.327 
2.323 

Yours  truly, 

MERRELL-SOULE  CO., 

(Signed)     0.  F.  Soule, 

Treasurer. 

R.  H.  Stevens  Company's  prices  at  West  Danby  shipping  sta- 
tion, 1915: 

Per  can  of 
40  quarts 

January $     55 

February 45 

March 35 

April 10 

May 00 

June 1  00 

July 1  10 

August 1  20 

September 1  35 

October ; 1  50 

November 1  70 

December 1  70 


224 


Cooperative  milk  station  prices  at  Adams  Center,   Jefferson 
county,  N".  Y. ;  station  now  operated  by  Libby-McNeil  Company : 


Prices  paid  per  cwt. 


1911 


1912        1913 


1914        1915 


1916 


$1 

.75 
57 
34 
10 
04 
99 
11 
29 
34 
58 
82 
87 

$1 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

~sT 

87 
81 
51 
40 
28 
16 
34 
46 
46 
58 
84 
99 

56 

$1  75 
1  75 
1  53 
1  47 
1  41 
1  25 
1  40 
1  60 
1  80 
1  80 
1  90 
1  90 

$1  63 

bent,  "N". 

1913 
$2  00 
1  85 
1  76 
1  81 
1  58 
1  58 
1  58 
1  74 
1  81 
1  85 
1  95 
1  95 

SI 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 

85 
85 
60 
25 
20 
25 
30 
40 
60 
70 
80 
90 

$1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 

80 
60 
60 
35 
30 
30 
45 
45 
45 
65 
68 
85 

$1  85 
1  70 
1  60 
1  45 
1  40 
1  35 

February 

1 

IMarch 

1 

April 

1 

IMay 

1 

June 

July 

1 

August 

1 

September 

1 

October 

1 

November 

1 

December 

1 

Seminole 

$1 

40 

$1  56 

Y.: 

1914 
$1  90 
1  80 
1  80 
1  75 
1  50 
1  40 
1  55 
1  70 
1  85 
1  90 
2  00 
2  05 

$1 

54 

1916 
$1  80 
1  75 
1  68 
1  45 
1  35 
1  25 
1  45 

Condensary,  Holland 

Pai 

1915 

$1  95 
90 
80 
58 
30 
24 
40 
1  56 
1  65 
1  80 
1  90 
1  95 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

N  ov  ember 

December 



EXHIBIT  NO.  96 

PRICE  PAID  PER  HUNDRED  POUNDS  MILK  BY  MCDERMOTT  DAIRY  COMPANY^ 
CANTON,  N.  Y.,  FROM  APRIL  1,  1907,  TO  MARCH  31,  1911,  AND  BY  THE 
STATE  SCHOOL  DAIRY  INDUSTRY  FROM  JANUARY  1,  1912,  TO  JULY  1,  1916. 

January,  1907 February,  1907 

January,  1908 

January,  1909 

January,  1910 

January,  1911 

January,  1912 

January,  1913 

January,  1914 

January,  1915 

January,  1916 


$2  00 

February,  1908  

$1  80 

1  75 

February,  1909  

1  75 

2  00 

February,  1910  

1  90 

2  10 

February,  1911 

1  80 

1  797 

February  1912 

2  212 

1  853 

February,  1913 

1  49 

1  874 

February,  1914 

1  741 

1  883 

February,  1915   

1  787 

1  859 

February.  1916.  . 

1  777 

«  .««     «„«' 


225 


EXHIBIT  No.  96  —  (Continued} 


March,  1907  

August,  1907  

1  15 

March,  1908  

1  60 

August,  1908  

1  15 

March,  1909  

1  55 

August,  1909  

1  15 

March,  1910  

1  60 

August,  1910  

1  50 

March,  1911  

1  55 

August,  1911  

March,  1912  

1  60 

August,  1912  

1  549 

March,  1913  

1  608 

August,  1913  

1  676 

March,  1914  

1  693 

August,  1914  

1  394 

March,  1915  

1  714 

August,  1915  

1  451 

March,  1916  

1  70 

August,  1916  

April,  1907  

1  20 

September,  1907  

1  25 

April,  1908  

1  20 

September,  1908  .... 

1  25 

April,  1909  

1  20 

September,  1909  

1  25 

April,  1910  

1  40 

September,  1910  

1  60 

April,  1911  

September,  1911  

April,  1912  

1  349 

September,  1912  

1  675 

April,  1913  

1  526 

September,  1913  

1  90 

April,  1914  

1  376 

September,  1914  

1  517 

April,  1915  

1  363 

September,  1915  

1  543 

April,  1916  

1  47 

September,  1916  

May,  1907  .  . 

1  05 

October,  1907  

1  70 

May,  1908  

1  05 

October,  1908  

1  55 

May,  1909  

1  05 

October,  1909  

1  80 

May,  1910  

1  15 

October,  1910  

1  80 

May,  1911  

October,  1911  

May,  1912  

1  247 

October,  1912  

1  753 

May,  1913  

1  276 

October,  1913  

1  969 

May,  1914  

1  24 

October,  1914  

1  534 

May,  1915  

1  164 

October,  1915  

2  025 

May,  1916  

1  226 

October,  1916  

June,  1907  

I  00 

November,  1907  

1  90 

June,  1908  

1  00 

November,  1908  

1  75 

June,  1909  

1  00 

November,  1909  

1  90 

June,  1910  

1  10 

November,  1910  

1  90 

June,  1911  

November,  1911.  .  . 

June,  1912  

1  104 

November,  1912  

1  874 

June,  1913  

1  126 

November,  1913  

2  075 

June,  1914  

1  083 

November,  1914  

1  968 

June,  1915  

1  068 

November,  1915  

2  025 

June,  1916  

1  177 

November,  1916  .  . 

July,  1907.  . 

1  10 

December,  1907  

2  00 

July,  1908  

1  10 

December,  1908  

1  75 

July,  1909  

1  10 

December,  1909  

2  00 

July,  1910  

1  20 

December,  1910  

2  10 

July,  1911  

December,  1911  

July,  1912  

1  249 

December,  1912  

1  917 

July,  1913  

1  277 

December,  1913  

1  957 

July,  1914  

1  226 

December,  1914  

1  980 

July,  1915  

1  255 

December,  1915  

2  045 

Julv,  1916  

December,  1916.  . 

226 


EXHIBIT  NO.  82 

ROSEMARY  CREAMERY,  ADAMS,  N.  Y.,  A.  R.  HEATH,  ADAMS  CENTER,  N.  Y 
Prices  Paid  for  Milk  for  Series  of  Years  to  Patrons 


191 
January  $ 

12         1913         1914         191, 

L  85      $1  76       $1  80      $1 

78 

February                                           .         1 

L  80         1  65         1  70         1 

70 

March                                                         ] 

L  62         1  65         1  60         1 

58 

April 

52         1  49         1  40         1 

35 

May                                    

30         1  35         1  30         1 

30 

June                             

18         1  25         1  25         1 

30 

July  .    .                   

47         1  40         1  30         1 

45 

August  
September  

52         1  55         1  40         1 
L  52         1  75         1  60         1 

45 
45 

October 

L  65         1  78         1  70         1 

60 

November 

1  94         1  90         1  80         1 

73 

December                                                 ' 

2  00         1  90         1  90         1 

85 

Average  12  months    $ 

L  61      SI  62      $1  56      $1 

55 

1916 

$1  85 


70 
CO 
50 
40 
35 


EXHIBIT  NO.  102 

BEAKE'S  DAIRY  COMPANY,  MASSENA,  N.  Y. — •  PHICES  1910-1916 
Statement  of  Prices  Paid  for  Milk 


Month 
Jan  .... 
Feb.  .  .  . 
Mar.  .  .  . 
Apr  .... 
May  .  .  . 

June  .  .  . 
Julv 

1910 
.85 
.80 
70          1 
.55-45 
25 

L.25 
L  30-35 

1911 
.65-55     ] 
.55-45     ] 
65          1 
15 
15 

95 
95 

1912 
L.80           1 
L.  80-70     1 
L  60          1 
45-35     1 
35           ] 
25-20 
05 
05-20 

1913 
L.70 
L.70 

L  55 
L  45 
L  20 

05 
05-15 

1914 
1.75 
1  60 
1  50-45 
1  25-15 
1  05 

95 
1  15 

1915 
1.75-70 
1.60 
1  55 
1  40 
1  20-15 

1  15 
1  15 

1916 
1.80 
1.80-70 
1  70-60 
1  45 
1  30 

1  15 

Aiiff 

L  35-45 

L  05-15 

25 

30 

1  25-30 

1  25 

Sept 

L  45 

L  25 

35-45 

45-55 

1  45-50 

1  35 

Oct 

L  45-55 

L  40 

45 

55-65 

1  60-65 

1  35 

Nov.  .  .  . 
Dec  

L  55-65     . 
L  65 

L  55-65 
L  75 

60-70 
L  80 

75 
75 

1  75 
1  75 

1  60-70 
1  70 

Herring  Dairy,  Gouverneur,  St.  Lawrence  county,  X.  V. 
Average  price  per  hundredweight  received  in  factory  and  milk 
station : 


1902. 
1903. 
1904. 
1905. 
1908. 
1907. 
1908. 


10  98 
1  06 
76 
1  00 
1  05 
1  21 
1  23 


1909. 
1910. 
1911. 
1912. 
1913. 
1914. 
1915. 


$1  36 
1  50 
1  23 
1  55 
1  45 
1  45 
1  45 


227 


Lowville  Milk  and  Cream  Company:  Price  Record  1902-1916, 
per  hundredweight : 


1902 

February 

March 

April 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December . . 


1C03 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

1904 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December . . 


1905 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December . . 


1  29 

1908 
January 

1  20 

February  

1  05 
05 

March  
April  

11 

Mav 

00 

t.  »*j 
June 

99 

July  

03 

August.  .  .  

17 
25 

September  
October 

29 

November 

1  53 

December  .        .    . 

1  41 
1  41 
1  32 

1907 
January  
February  
March  

1  24 

April 

May 

1  041 

June 

1  03 

July  

1  05 

1  18 

August  
September  

1  15 

October 

18 

November.  . 

29 
24 

December  

1908 
January.  . 

18 

February  

18 

March 

06 

April 

63 

May  

70 

June  

81 

July  

1  10 
94 
1  12 

August  
September  
October  . 

1  35 

November.  .    .  . 

1  53 

December  

1  41 
1  35 
1  24 

1909 
January  
February  
March     .  . 

1  12 

April  

97 

May  

82 

June  

1  00 
1  06 

July  
August  .  . 

1  06 

September  

1  18 

October  

1  26 
1  41 

November  
December  .  . 

$1  41 


1  37 
1  24 
1  12 
98 
94 
1  02 
1  12 
1  12 
1  29 
1  41 
1  65 


65 
41 
25 
20 
12 
06 
12 
34 
35 
65 
76 
76 


76 
53 
41 
24 
00 
94 
06 
06 
24 
53 
69 
76 


72 

47 
41 
24 
02 
94 
18 
35 
53 
05 
80 
88 


228 


1910 

July  

1  21 

January  
February  
IMarch 

1  82        August  
1  76        September  
1  65        October  

35 
46 
69 

April 

1  45        November  

85 

May  

1  18        December  

93 

June  

1  19 

July  

1  41                1912 

August  

1  53        January  

1  93 

September  

1  65        February  

1  82 

October  -.  

1  81        March  

1  53 

November  

1  81        April  

1  41 

December  

.  ....           1  93        May  

1  29 

June  

1  29 

1911 

July  

1  41 

January  
February  
]March 

1  76        August  
1  65        September  
1  29        October  

1  53 

1  58 
1  70 

April  
May  

I  12        November,  grade 
I  06        December,  grade 

C... 
B  

1  81 
1  93 

June  

1  06 

1913 

Grade  B 

Grade  C 

January..  

$1  81 

$1  70 

February  

1  76 

1  65 

March  

1  53 

1  41 

April  

1  53 

1  41 

May  

1  29 

1  18 

June  

1  29 

1  19 

July  

1  29 

1  19 

August  

1  58 

1  48 

September  

1  68 

1  58 

October  

1  78 

1  68 

November  

2  05 

1  95 

December  

2  05 

1  95 

1914 

January  

1  90 

i   80 

February  

.  .  .  .-  1  75 

65 

March  :.','. 

1  65 

U  55 

April  

1  40 

1  30  for  3.8 

milk 

April  
May  

1  50  better  than  3.8 
1  25  better  than  3.8 

May  

1  15  below  3.8 

1  05 

June  

1  25  better  than  3.8 

June  

1  15  below  3.8 

1  05 

July  

1  35,  3.8  or  better 

July  

1  25  below  3.8 

1  15 

August  

1  40,  3.8  or  better 

August  

1  30  below  3.8 

1  20 

September  

1  68 

1  58 

October  

1  78 

1  68 

November  

2  05 

1  95 

December  

2  05 

1  95 

1915 

January  

1  90 

1  80 

February  

1  75 

1  65 

March  

1  75 

1  65 

April  
May  

1  53 
1  67 

1  43 
1  57 

June  

1  52 

1  42 

229 


1915 

Grade  B 

July  

$1  44 

August  

1  31 

September  

1  40 

October  

November  

1  91 

December  

1  91 

1916 

January  
February  

$1  81 
1  76 

March  

1  71 

April  

1  50 

May  

1  40 

June  

1  30 

July  

1  40 

August  

1  50 

September  

1  70 

$1  42' 


Comparative  Prices  Paid  a!  Lyms  Falls 


1912 

August $1  60 

September 1  60 

October 1  85 

November 1  95 

December 2  00 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 


1913 

$1  60 

1  70 

1  85 

1  90 

2  00 


90 

90 
65 

48 
36 
30 
42 


Grade  C 

$1  34 

1  21 

1  30 


914 

1915 

1  40 

$1  40 

1  60 

1  50 

1  80 

1  60 

1  90 

1  80 

1  90 

1  90 

85 

1  80 

75 

1  70 

60 

1  55 

40 

1  35 

20 

1  30 

15 

1  40 

1  30 

1  40 

1916 
$1  50 
1  70 


80 
80 
65 
50 
40 
30 
40 


Mr.  William  II.  Dewey  testified :  "  This  was  a  co-operative 
company,  but  Mr.  Arnstein  took  over  the  stock  somewhere  along 
about  October,  1913.  You  will  notice  the  difference  in  the  prices 
as  soon  as  Arnstein  gets  the  contract,  viz:  November,  1912,  $1.95 ; 
November,  1913,  $1.90;  November,  1914,  $1.90;  November, 
1915,  $1.80,  etc. 

Then  Zellner  leased  the  station.  You  will  notice  the  difference. 
Take  the  month  of  October,  for  instance.  Under  Zellner,  1915, 
it  was  $1.85;  1913,  $1.85.  Then  Arnstein  got  it;  1914,  $1.80; 
1915,  $1.60.  The  co-operative  station  kept  the  price  up  until  we 
lost  it. 


*  NOTE. — The  price  $1.42  for  October,  1915,  occurred  by  reason  of  milk 
dealers'  contract  terminating  and  the  company  manufacturing  cheese. 


230 


The  Mutual-McDermott  Dairy  Corporation  gives  us  the  follow- 
ing table  of  prices  paid  for  milk  at  four  type  stations  in  the  fol- 
lowing localities :  Burke,  Franklin  county  •  Canton,  St.  Lawrence 
county;  Deposit,  Delaware  county,  and  Montgomery,  Orange 
county,  for  the  years  1912-1916: 

X  —   3c  per  100  Ibs.  additional  for  each  1-10%  of  butter  fat  over  3% 
O  —    3c  per  100  Ibs.  additional  for  each  1-10%  of  butter  fat  over  3.3% 
Z  —    3c  per  100  Ibs.  additinoal  for  each  1-10%  of  butter  fat  over  3.7% 
S  —  lOc  per  100  Ibs.  additional  for  milk  testing  3.7%  butter  fat  or  better 


1912 

Burke 

Canton 

Mont 
Deposit     gomery 

January  

$1 

85 

$1 

70 

$2 

00 

$1 

85 

Februarv  

1 

75 

1 

55 

1-15 

2 

00 

1 

80 

February  

16-29 

1 

88 

March  

.  .  1-15 

1 

60 

1 

40 

1 

76 

1 

65 

March  

16-31 

1 

50 

April  

1 

40 

1 

35 

1 

64 

1 

50 

May  

1 

30 

1 

10 

1 

53 

1 

25 

June  

1 

15 

1 

20 

1 

41 

1 

10 

July  

..1-15 

1 

20 

1 

25 

1-15 

1 

41 

1 

30 

July  

16-19 

1 

25 

16-31 

1 

64 

July 

20-31 

1 

40 

August  

1-15 

1 

40 

1 

40 

1 

64 

1 

70 

August  

16-31 

1 

50 

September  

1 

60 

1 

55 

1 

64 

1 

70 

October  

1 

70 

1 

70 

1 

76 

1 

80 

November  

1 

80 

1 

85 

1-10 

1 

88 

1 

90 

November  

11-30 

2 

00 

December  

1 

90 

1 

90 

2 

11 

i 

90 

1913 


J  anuarv  

$1 

SO 

$1  80 

February  

1 

75 

1  55 

March  

1 

60 

1  50 

Apiil  

1 

45 

Z 

1  50 

April  

May  

1 

30 

Z 

1  25 

June  

1 

25 

Z 

1  10 

July  

1 

35 

Z 

1  35 

July  



August  

1 

45 

Z 

1  45 

September  
October  

1 
1 

70 

85 

Z 
Z 

1  60 

1  85 

November  

1 

90 

Z 

1  95 

December  

1 

90 

Z 

1  95 

$1 

88 

$1 

85 

1 

88 

1 

75 

1 

76 

1 

70 

1-10 

1 

76 

Z 

1 

60 

11-30 

1 

64 

. 

1 

53 

Z 

1 

35 

1 

41 

Z 

1 

20 

1-15 

1 

41 

Z 

1 

55 

16-31 

1 

64 

1 

64 

z' 

l' 

65 

1 

64 

Z 

1 

75 

Z 

1 

96 

Z 

1 

95 

Z 

1 

95 

Z 

1 

95 

Z 

1 

90 

Z 

—  -  •  • 

2 

•_:—_!_-". 

05 

: 

Figures  indicate  prices  actually  paid  to  patrons,  including  the  premiums. 


231 


1914 

Burke 

January  

$1  85 

February  

1  75 

March  

1  55 

April  
May  

1  35 
1  15 

June  

1  10 

July  

1  25 

August  

1  40 

September  

1  65 

October  

1  75 

November  

1  85 

December  

1  95 

1915 

January  

1  80 

February  

1  70 

March  

1  60 

April  
May  

1  40 
1  35 

June  

1  40 

July  

1  45 

August  

1  40 

September  

1  50 

October  

1  85 

November  

1  95 

December  

1  95 

1916 

January  

1  85 

February  

1  80 

February  

*1  72 

March  

1  70 

March  

*1  64 

April  

1  60 

April  
May  

*1  53 
1  40 

May  

*1  30 

June  

1  35 

June  

*1  25 

July  

1  45 

July  

*  1  35 

August  

1  55 

August  

*  1  46 

September  

1  80 

September  

*1  73 

October  

X    2  05 

October  

*2  25 

November  

X    2  15 

November  

*2  38 

December  

X    2  15 

December  

*2  34 

Canton 
Z  SI  85 


Deposit 
Z  $1  85 


Mont- 
gomery 
Z  $1  90 


Z 
Z 
Z 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 


70 
65 
30 
05 
00 
15 
30 
40 
80 
80 
90 


85 
75 
70 
21 
96 
90 
06 
22 
31 
60 
70 
70 


X  1 
*1 

X  1 
*1 

X  1 


1  60 
1  55 

H  77 
1  50 
*1  70 
40 

47 
15 
25 
09 


*1  21 


25 
37 
41 
57 
50 


1  68 


X  2 


X 


05 

*2  34 
2  15 

*2  44 
2  15 

*2  44 


75 
70 
40 
15 
10 
30 
45 
55 
85 
90 
90 


85 
75 
70 
35 
10 
05 
25 
40 
50 
80 
90 
90 


80 
70 
81 
60 
71 
40 
57 
15 
32 
09 
27 
25 
46 
41 
73 
50 

*1  63 
X  2  05 

*2  35 
X  2  15 

*2  47 
X  2  15 

*2  44 


O 


S 

s 

8 

X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 
X 


O 


90 
75 
45 
20 
15 
30 
45 
55 
85 
95 
95 


90 
80 
75 
31 
06 
00 
16 
32 
41 
70 
80 
80 


X  1  70 
X  1  65 

*1  85 

X  1  60 

*1 

1 


81 
50 


62 
25 
38 
19 
32 
35 
46 
51 
63 
60 
74 
15 


i 
*i 

i 
*i 

2 

*2  41 

X  2  25 

*closed 

X  2  25 

*closed 


1916 


232 


The  Standard  Dairy  Company  furnishes  the  following  state- 
ments : 

Average  Prices  Paid  per  Hundred  for  3  to  3.5  Butterfat 

1912    1913    1914    1915 

January $1  95 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December .  . 


1  95 

$1  85 

$1  85   $1  80 

$1  80 

1  70 

1  75 

1  75 

75 

1  75 

1  58 

1  70 

1  70 

65 

1  65 

1  41 

50 

1  40 

36 

1  45 

1  29 

35 

1  15 

25 

1  33 

1  17 

15 

1  10 

18 

1  20 

1  30 

35 

1  25 

30 

1  35 

1  47 

55 

40 

40 

1  50 

1  58 

70 

50 

47 

1  65 

1  70 

80 

80    1  75 

2  20 

1  75 

1  90 

90    1  85 

2  30 

1  85 

2  00 

•_.:i^r 

90    1  85 

2  30 

The  Locust  Farms  Company  furnishes  the  following  prices  for 
the  stations  named: 

1912 
Per  100  pounds 


January 

Nassau         Golden 
North  Chatham    Bridge 
Stuyvesant  Falls     N.  Y. 
$1  95          $1  95 

Verbank, 

N.Y. 
$1  95 

Billings,       Walden, 
N.  Y.          N.  Y. 

$1  95 

February  . 
March  .  .  .  . 

1  90            1  91 
75            1  75 

1  91 
1  75 

1  91 
1  75 

April  

50            1  50 

1  50 

1  50 

May  

25                35 

1  25 

1  25 

June  

10                20 

.     1  20 

1  20 

July 

30                40 

1  40 

1  40 

August 

70                80 

1  80 

1  80 

September  . 
October  .  .  . 

1  90                90 
1  90                90 

1  90 
1  90 

1  90 
1  90 

November  . 
December  . 

2  00            2  00 
2  00            2  00 

2  00 
2  00 

2  00 

2  00 

January  .  .  . 

1913 
Per  100  pound 

Nassau          Golden 
North  Chatham    Bridge, 
Stuyvesant  Falls     N.  Y. 
....              $1  95          $1  95 

s 

Verbank, 
N.Y. 

$1  95 

Billings,       Walden 
N.  Y.          N.  Y.  ; 
$1  95 

February  .  . 

1  85     •       1  85 

1  85 

1  85 

March 

1  80            1  80 

1  80 

1  80 

April  

1  70            1  70 

1  70 

1  70 

May  

1  45             1  45 

1  45 

1  4£ 

June 

1  30             1  30 

1  30 

1  30 

July 

1  50             1  50 

1  50 

1  50 

August  .  .    . 

1  70            1  70 

1  70 

1  70 

September  . 

1  85             1  85 

1  85 

1  85 

October  .  .  . 

2  00            2  00 

2  00 

2  00 

November  . 

2  10            2  10 

2  10 

2  10 

December  . 

2  10            2  10 

2  10 

2  10 

233 


January .  .  . 
February .  . 
March .  .  .  . 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August .  . . . 
September . 
October .  .  . 
November . 
December . 


January 

February  

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December .  . 


January .  .  . 
February .  . 
March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 
September . 
October .  .  . 
November . 
December . 


1914 

$2  05 

$2  05 

$2  05 

$2  05 

95 

1  95 

95 

1  95 

90 

1  90 

90 

1  90 

60 

1  60 

70 

1  60 

35 

1  35 

45 

1  75 

30 

1  30 

40 

1  70 

40 

1  40 

55 

1  45 

65 

1  65 

75 

1  60 

1  80 

1  80 

90 

1  70 

2  10 

2  10 

2  20 

2  10 

2  10 

2  10 

2  20 

2  10 

2  10 

2  10 

2  20 

2  10 

1915 

Per 

100  pounds 

$2  05 

$2  05 

$2  15 

$2.05 

1  95 

1  95 

2  05 

1  95 

1  90 

1  90 

2  00 

1  90 

1  54 

1  55 

1  65 

1  55 

1  29 

1  30 

1  40 

1  30 

1  24 

1  24 

1  34 

1  24 

1  34 

1  40 

1  50 

1  40 

1  59 

1  56 

1  66 

1  56 

1  74 

1  65 

1  75 

1  65 

2  04 

2  04 

2  14 

2  14 

2  14 

2  14 

2  24 

2  24 

2  14 

2  14 

2  24 

2  24 

1916 

Per 

100  pounds 

$2  00 

$2  00 

$2  10 

$2  10 

1  95 

1  95 

2  05 

2  05 

1  90 

1  90 

2  00 

2  00 

1  71 

1  71 

1  76 

1  76 

1  46 

1  46 

1  51 

1  51 

1  35 

1  35 

1  45 

1  45 

1  56 

1  56 

1  66 

1  66 

1  72 

1  72 

1  82 

1  82 

1  81 

1  81 

1  91 

1  91 

2  45 

2  45 

2  55 

2  55 

2  55 

2  55 

2  65 

2  65 

2  55 

2  55 

2  65 

2  65 

$2  00 
2  00 
2  00 


$2  05 


00 
05 
76 
51 

45 

61 

1  77 

1  86 

2  45 
2  55 
2  55 


Prices  quoted  are  for  100  pounds  milk  testing  4  per  cent  butter  fat. 
One  quart  milk  averaging  2|  pounds. 

Bonus  of  3  cents  for  each  one-tenth  of  1  per  cent  paid  for  milk  testing  above 
4  per  cent  and  likewise  a  deduction  of  3  cents  for  each  one-tenth  of  1  per  cent  is 
made  for  milk  testing  below  p4  ei  cent  butter  fat. 

Submitted  by 

LOCUST  FARMS  COMPANY, 
458  10th  Avenue,  New  York  City." 


234 

The  Borden  Company  classified  its  two  schedules,  the  first  for 
market  milk  for  the  years  1912-1916,  which  is  as  follows: 

MILK  PURCHASE  PRICES  FOR  BORDEN'S  FARM  PRODUCTS  DIVISION 

Short  Haul 

Long  Haul  —  Deduct  10  cents  per  hundred  pounds  from  the  following  prices*: 

1912 

Flat,  per         Barn  score  68  Voluntary 

100  Ibs.          Grade  B,  raw  3.8  fat        increase  Total 

January $1  95                 SI  95 

February 1  90                 1  90 

March 1  75                 1  75 

April 150                  $010         160 

May 1  25                        10         1  35 

June 1  10                        10         1  20 

July 1  30                        10         1  40 

August ' 1  45                        10         $0  25  1  80 

September 1  55                        10         15  1  80 

October 1  80                        10         1  90 

November 1  90                        10         2  00 

December 1  90                       10         2  00 


1913 

January $185                  $010         SI  95 

February 1  75  10         1  85 

March 1  70  10         1  80 

April 150  10  1010          $007  177 

May 1  25  10  10                07  1  52 

June 1  10  10  10                07  1  37 

July 1  35  10  10                08  1  63 

August 1  45  10  10                10  1  75 

September 1  55  10  10                 11  1  88 

October 1  80  10  10                11  211 

November 1  90  10  10                05  2  15 

December..  1  90  10  10  2  10 


1914 

January $185                  $010          $010  $205 

February 1  75  10  10  1  95 

March 1  70  10  10  1  90 

April 140  10  10  160 

May 1  15  10  10  1  35 

June 1  10  10  10  1  30 

July 1  25  10  10  1  45 

August 1  40  10  10  1  60 

September 1  50  10  10  1  70 

October 1  80  10  10  2  00 

November 1  90  10  10  2  10 

December 1  90  10  10  2  10 


*  Except  in  September.   1912,  and  September,  1913,  where  only  5  cents  is 
to  be  deducted. 


235 


1915 


January  §1  85 

§0  10          $0  10         
10                10         
10                10 

$2  05 
1  95 
1  90 

February  75 
March  70 

3*3  r»pv  r»f>nt  lintfpr  fat 

April  31 

NOTE.  —  10  cents  per  hundred  pounds 
is    deducted    for    milk    scoring    less 
than  68. 

NOTE.  —  We    pay    three    cents    addi- 
tional for  each  one-tenth  of  one  per 
cent  of  butter  fat. 

1916 
Flat,  per      Voluntary 
100  Ibs.        increase             Total 

$1  70 

Mav                                              06 

June  00 
July  16 
August  32 

September  41 

October.                                      70 

November                                   80 

December  80 

January  

February 

1  65 

March 

1  60 

April  

3.3  per  cent  butter  fat 
$1  40              $0  10 

$1  50 
1  25 
I  19 
1  35 
1  51 
1  60 

2  15 
2  25 
2  25 

May 

1  15                    10 

,     J  
June 

1  09                    10 

July  . 

1  35             .... 

August  

1  51 

September  

1  60             

October  

3.0  per  cent  butter  fat 
$2  15 

November. 

2  25 

December.  .  . 

2  25 

For  milk  used  in  the  canned  goods  division,  to  be  condensed  or 
evaporated,  the  Borden  Company  furnishes  the  following  state- 
ment of  prices  paid: 


January . . . 
February  .  . 
March. 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August .  . .  . 
September . 
October. .  .  . 
November . 
December. . 


Milk  Prices,  Short  PI  aid  Zone 


Flat 
$1  95 
90 
75 
50 
25 
10 
30 
45 
55 
80 
90 
90 


1912 
Barn 
score 


B.  F. 
3.8 


Vol. 
inc. 


$0  25 
15 


$0  10 
10 
10 


Total 


SI 
1 

1 


95 
90 
75 
50 
25 
10 
30 
70 
70 
90 
00 
00 


236 


1913 


January .  .  . 
February .  . 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August .... 
September . 
October. .  .  . 
November . 
December. . 


Flat 

SI  85 
1  75 
1  70 
1  50 
1  25 
10 
35 
45 
55 
80 
90 
90 


Barn 
score 
SO  10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 


B.  F. 

3.8 


$0  10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 


Vol. 

inc. 


SO  07 
07 
07 
08 
10 
11 
11 
05 


Total 

SI  95 


85 
80 


1  77 


52 

37 

63 

75 

86 

2  11 

2  15 

2  10 


1914 


January .... 
February .  .  . 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September .  . 

October 

November .  . 
December. . , 


Flat 
$1  85 
75 
70 
40 
15 
10 


1 
1 
1 
1 
1 

1  25 
1  40 
1  50 
1  80 
1  90 
1  90 


Barn 
score 
SO  10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 


B.  F. 

3.8 
SO  10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 


Vol. 
inc. 


Total 
$2  05 
95 
90 
60 
35 
30 
45 


1  60 

1  70 

2  00 
2  10 
2  10 


1915 

Barn  B.  F.  Vol.  • 

Flat  score  3.8  inc.  Total 

January $1  85          $0  10          SO  10         $2  05 

February 1  75  10  10         1  95 

March 1  70  10  10         1  90 

April ==    ===    _  _  — 

May 

June 

July 

August No  canned  goods  factories  in  short  haul  zone 

September after  March  31,  1915 

October 

November 

December 

1916 

Barn  B.  F.  Vol. 

Flat  score  3.8  inc.  Total 

January 

February  

March 

April 

May No  canned  goods  factories  in  short  haul  zone 

June after  March  31,  1915 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December. . . 


237 


Milk  Prices  Long  Haul  Zone 
1912 


January 

Flat 

$1  85 

Barn 
score 

B.  F. 
3.8 

Vol. 
inc. 

February 

80 

Miarch 

65 

April 

40 

May 

15 

June 

00 

July 

20 

August 

35 

$0  25 

September  .... 

1  50 

15 

October 

1  70 

$0  10 

November 

1  80 

10 

'  December 

1  80 

10 

January 

Flat 

$1  75 

1913 
Bam 
score 
$0  10 

B.  F. 

3.8 

Vo.l 
inc. 

February  
JVlarch 

1  65 
1  60 

10 
10 





Anril 

1  40 

10 

$  10 

May 

1  15 

10 

10 

June 

1  00 

10 

10 

July 

25 

10 

10 

August 

35 

10 

10 

September 

50 

10 

10 

October 

70 

10 

10 

$  11 

November 

80 

10 

10 

05 

December 

80 

10 

10 

January  

Flat 

$1  75 

1914 
Barn 
score 
$0  10 

B.  F. 
3.8 

$0  10 

Vol. 
inc. 

February 

65 

10 

10 

March 

60 

10 

10 

April 

30 

10 

10 

May            .      . 

05 

10 

10 

June      

00 

10 

10 

Julv 

15 

10 

10 

August 

30 

10 

10 

September 

40 

10 

10 

October 

70 

10 

10 

November 

80 

10 

10 

December  .  . 

1  80 

10 

10 

Total 
$1  85 
1  80 
1  65 
1  40 
1  15 
1  00 
1  20 
1  60 
1  65 
1  80 
1  90 
1  90 


Total 
$1  85 

1  75 
70 
60 
35 
20 
45 
55 
70 

2  01 
2  05 
2  00 


Total 


$1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

1 
1 

1 

•K 
1 
2 

2 


95 
85 
80 
50 
25 
20 
35 
5C 
6C 
90 
00 
00 


238 


January . 
February 
March .  . 


Flat 

$1  75 

1  65 

1  60 


1915 

Barn 

score 

$0  10 

10 

10 


B.  F. 

3.8 

$0  10 

10 

10 


Vol. 
inc. 


Tota 

$1  95 
1  85 
1  80 


3.0  per  cent  less  10  cents  for  dairies  not  scoring 

April $1  21* 

May 96 

June 90 

July 1  06 

August 1  22     3  cents  each  1-10  of  1  per  cent  additional 

September 1  31 

October 1  60 

November 1  70 

December 1  70 

1916 
3.0  per  cent  "less  10  cents  for  dairies  not  scoring 

January $1  60 

February 1  55 

March 1  50 

3.3  per  cent  Vol.  inc.  * 

April $1  30  $0  10  % 

May    1  05  10 

June 99  10 

July 1  25  

August 1  41  3  cents  for  each  1-10  of  1  per 

September . .  1  50  cent  additional 

3.07  per  cent 

October 1  80          $    49 

November 2  15  

December 2  15  


Prices  Western  New  York 


January . 
February .  . 
March .... 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 
September . 
October .  .  . 
November . 
December . 


Flat 
$1  85 
1  75 
1  60 
35 
15 
05 
15 
30 
40 
65 
1  80 
1  80 


1912 
Barn 
score 


B.  F. 

3.8 


Vol. 
inc. 


$0  25 
15 


Total 


85 
75 
60 
35 
15 
05 
15 
55 
55 
65 
80 
80 


239 


Flat 
January            $1  80 

1913 
Bam            B.  F.            Vol. 
score             3.8              inc.            Total 
SI  80 

February  1  70 

....                                                  1  70 

March  1  55 

55 

April                                           1  40 

$0  10          $0  07                57 

May                .                             1  25 

10                07                42 

June  1  10 

10                07                27 

July  1  25 

10                08                43 

August                                        1  40 

10                10                60 

September                                  1  50 

10                11                71 

October  1  70 

10                11                91 

November  1  80 

....                 10                05                95 

December  1  80 

10         90 

Flat 
January                                    $1  80 

1914 
Barn             B.  F.           Vol. 
score              3.8              inc.             Total 
$0  10                                1  90 

February                                     1  70 

10                                1  80 

March                                         1  55 

10                                    65 

April                       .  .                       30 

10                                    40 

May  15 

...                 10                                    25 

June  05 

10                                    15 

July                                                 15 

10                                   25 

August  25 

10         1  35 

September    .                                  40 

10                                1  50 

October  75 

$0  10                10                                1  95 

November  80 
December  80 

10                10         2  00 
10                10         2  00 

Flat 
January  $1  75 

1915 
Barn           B.  F.             Vol. 
score             inc.              Inc.             Total 
$0  10          $0  10           .                   $1  95 

February  1  65 

10                10                                1  85 

March                                         1  55 

10                10                                1  75 

3.0% 
April  $1  16  ' 

Less  10  cents  for  dairies  not  scoring 

May  1  01 

June  1  01 

July.    .                .                       1  01 

August  .  .             1  15 

[•  3    cents    for  each   1-10  of    one  per  cent 

.September  1  27 

additional 

October  1  51 

November                                  1  56 

December  .  .                               1  56 

240 

1916 

Flat 

3.0  per  cent 
January  $1  56 

less  10  cents  for  dairies  not  scoring 

February  1  53 

March  1  46 

April  1  31 

May  1  16 

June  1  16 

1-  3  cents  for  each  1-10  of  1  per  cent 

July  1  16 

additional  . 

August  1  26 

September  1  46 

October  1  66+.  10 

November  2  05+  .  10 

December  2  15 

PRICES  AT  FRANKFORT  AND  NEWPORT,  N.  Y. 

1912 

Barn           B.  F.            Vol. 

Flat            Score             3.8               inc.             Total 

January  $1  75 

SI 

7i 

February  1  70 

1 

70 

March  1  55 

1 

56 

April  1  30 

1 

30 

May  1  05 

1 

05 

June  90 

$0  10             1 

00 

July  1  05 

15             1 

20 

August  1  20 

40             1 

00 

September  1  30 
October  1  75 

35             1 
1 

65 

75 

November  1  90 

1 

90 

December  1  90 

1 

90 

1913 

Barn             B.  F.            Vol. 

Flat            Score             3.8              inc.             Total 

January  $1  85 

$0  05          $1 

90 

February  75 

1 

75 

March  65 

1 

65 

April  45 
May  25 

1 
,  1 

45 
25 

June  10 

1 

10 

July  30 

10             1 

40 

August  45 

15             I 

60 

September  60 

15             1 

75 

October  :    80 

1 

80 

November  90 

1 

90 

December  90 

1 

90 

241 


January .  .  . 
February . . 
March .... 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 
September . 
October .  .  . 
November . 
December . 


Flat 
$1  85 
80 
60 
40 
20 
10 
20 
40 


1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1  50 


80 
80 

80 


1914 
Barn 
score 


B.  F. 
3.8 


Vol. 
Inc. 


$0  10 


Total 
$1  85 
1  80 
1  60 
1  40 
1  20 
1  10 
20 
40 
60 
80 
80 
80 


January 

February 

March .  . 


April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December .  . 


Flat 

$1  80 

1  70 

1  60 

3.0% 


1915 
Barn 
score 


B.  F. 

3.8 


Vol. 
inc. 


Total 

$1  80 

1  70 

1  60 


January  

February  

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December. . . 


$1  21) 

96 

90 

1  06 

1  22 

3  cents  each  1-10  of  1  per  cent  additional. 

1  31 

1  47 

1  57 

1  57 

1916 

Flat  3.0  per  cent 

$1  57            } 

1  54 

1  48 

1  21 

1  11 

05 

3  cents  for  each  1-10  of  one  per  cent 

21 

additional. 

40 

46 

80+.  15 

2  05 

2  05 

Manufacturing  department  (canned  goods  division),  production  section. 

R.  T.  S." 

From  a  study  of  the  foregoing  schedule  of  prices,  bearing  in 
mind  the  fact  that  in  the  large  majority  of  dairies  nearly  two- 
thirds  of  the  production  would  be  made  during  the  months  from 
April  to  October,  inclusive,  it  becomes  apparent  that  it  would  be 
difficult  for  the  owner  of  the  average  5,000  pound  cow  to  secure 


242 

from  the  sale  from  market  milk  a  gross  return  of  $80  for  milk 
testing  3.7  butter  fat.  Of  course,  this  includes  no  return  for  the 
calf  or  manure.  But  the  hired  man  must  be  paid  in  cash.  In- 
creased fertility  of  the  soil  does  not  appeal  to  him.  Even  the  dairy 
farmer  finds  himself  in  need  of  some  immediate  cash  return  for  his 
labor1  and  that  of  his  family.  He  cannot  be  expected  to  take 
his  entire  return  in  manure. 

VALUE  or  THE  FARM  HOME 

However,  there  is  another  factor  to  be  considered  in  determin- 
ing the  income  from  a  dairy  farm  for  the  labor  of  the  farmer  en- 
gaged therein.  It  may  perhaps  be  stated  that  one  of  the  valuable 
by-products  of  the  dairy  industry  is  the  farm  home.  It  is  fre- 
uently  characterized  as  an  independent  life  and  a  healthy  occupa- 
tion. A  New  England  writer  observed,  however,  that  his  neigh- 
bors did  not  own  their  farms,  but  their  farms  owned  them.  When 
we  consider  that  the  dairy  requires  practically  its  regular  labor  on 
every  iSunday  and  holiday  throughout  the  year,  and  the  farm 
housewife  must  perform  the  accompanying  housekeeping  tasks 
each  day  with  unceasing  regularity,  these  features  may  not  prove 
sufficiently  attractive.  These  factors  take  away,  in  considerable 
degree,  the  independence  so  far  as  the  dairy  farmer  is  concerned. 
It  is  obviously  true,  however,  that  the  healthy  surroundings  and 
occupations  of  the  dairy  farm  are  desirable  from  many  points  of 
view.  The  training  and  environment  produces  strong  men  and 
women  for  the  State.  The  rearing,  owning  and  caring  for  cattle 
is  an  elemental  desire  of  civilized  man.  The  pursuit  is  instinctive 
in  the  nature  of  a  large  part  of  mankind  and  has  fascinations  and 
delights  unconnected  with  the  idea  of  immediate  cash  returns. 
Many  men  of  wealth  devote  a  part  of  their  time  and  large  portions 
of  their  capital  to  this  occupation  at  a  financial  loss  and  without 
giving  great  consideration  to  the  cash  returns.  Perhaps  this  factor 
has  contributed  in  a  greater  degree  than  is  sometimes  considered 
to  the  up-building  and  development  of  the  dairy  industry  in  the 
State. 

CASH  VALUE  TO  THE  AVERAGE  DAIRY  FARMER 

The  dairy  farm  is  assumed  to  furnish  in  large  part  fuel,  house 
rent,  garden  vegetables,  eggs  and  poultry  for  the  family  table 


243 

with  but  little  additional  expenditure.  The  Committee  has  at: 
tempted  to  have  an  approximate  cash  value  placed  on  these  items. 
The  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  in  Bulletin  No: 
035,  as  a  result  of  its  studies  of  4$3  farms  in  ten  states,  placed 
this  value  as  follows : 

Food..  $261  00 

Fuel 35  00 

House .  .  125  00 


Total $421  00 

As  to  106  farms  in  Livingston  county,  ^N".  Y.,  this  bulletin  gives 
the  following  items : 

Food $249  00 

Fuel 41  00 

House. .  126  00 


Total $416  00 

This  item  was  discussed  with  many  witnesses.  In  most  cases, 
the  witnesses  appeared  to  think  the  values  too  high  or  that  they 
should  not  be  credited  as  a  by-product  of  the  dairy  farm.  They 
contended  that  the  food  and  fuel  had  an  actual  labor  cost  in  ad- 
dition to  the  dairy  labor,  off-setting  its  value,  so  that  the  only 
item  that  should  be  properly  credited  was  house  rent.  However 
this  may  be,  it  is  believed  that  the  farm  home  has  elements  of 
value  in  the  way  of  healthful  surroundings  and  abundance  of  food 
supply  at  low  cost  which  cannot  in  any  wise  be  afforded  by  the 
average  employee  in  manufacturing  centers.  But  two  things 
must  be  considered  in  discussing  this  fact,  first :  the  farm  home 
requires  a  capital  investment  which  is  not  required  by  the  employee 
in  the  manufacturing  center;  second,  the  farm  home  is  equally 
provided  by  agricultural  pursuits  other  than  dairying,  which  latter 
pursuit  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the  State  to  foster  and 
encourage. 

BFTTER  FAT  TEST  FROM  STATION  RECORDS 
Believing  that  it  will  be  of  interest  to  dairymen  and  to  the 
Committee  to  collect  for  comparative  purposes,  series  of  the 
records  of  patrons,  butter  fat  tests  from  different  sections  of  the 
State,  a  large  number  of  such  tests  have  been  taken  and  are  in- 
cluded in  the  minutes  of  these  hearings.  They  afford  a  certain 


244 

measure  of  information  as  to  the  increase  and  decrease  of  butter 
fat  during  the  different  seasons  of  the  year  in  the  average  dairy. 
They  may  also  be  of  considerable  value  for  other  purposes.  In 
studying  these  tests,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  butter  fat 
test  is  no  more  accurate  or  honest  than  the  equipment  and  the  indi- 
vidual making  it  and  the  care  and  skill  employed  by  him  in  the 
process.  As  a  preliminary  to  these  test  records,  some  of  the  evi- 
dence presented  to  the  Committee  may  be  of  importance. 

Professor  H.  C.  TROY,  of  the  State  College  of  Agriculture, 
called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  might  start  with  sampling.  Probably  the  principal  reason 
why  a  man  uses  a  sampling  tube  in,  place  of  a  dipper  is  that  he 
desired  to  get  a  proportionate  amount  of  the  cream  that  was  in 
the  weigh  can  to  place  in  a  composite  sample  and  the  amount  that 
he  got  in  his  tube  would  depend  on  the  depth  of  the  cream  in  the 
weigh  can.  If  a  can  had  one  hundred  pounds,  he  would  get  in 
the  tube,  or  take  from  the  can  one-half  of  the  amount  that  he 
would  take  if  the  can  had  two  hundred  pounds  in  it.  He  regu- 
lates that  by  the  depth  of  the  cream  in  the  tube.  The  tube  is  in  a 
way  automatic  in  its  action.  It  is  a  hollow  tube,  called  a  sampling 
tube,  and  he  places  it  down  to  the  bottom  of  the  can  and  allows  the 
milk  to  flow  into  the  tube  to  the  normal  depth.  If  there  was  one 
hundred  pounds  in  the  can  it  should  be  one-half  as  deep  as  if  there 
was  two  hundred  and  it  would  only  fill  the  tube  one-half  as  high. 
He  places  this  sample  in  a  test  bottle  in  which  all  of  the  samples 
are  placed  of  the  individual  milk  dealers  to  that  factory  or  sta- 
tion. Possibly  he  gets  five  cubic  centimeters  or  five  grams.  The 
next  day  the  man  may  deliver  two  hundred  pounds  or  he  may 
deliver  one  hundred  and  twenty.  Ins  any  case,  he  wants  a  pro- 
portionate sample,  so  he  places  his  tube  down  again ;  it  fills  higher 
up  in  the  tube  and  he  gets  a  much  larger  amount  and  places  tha^ 
with  the  sample  taken  the  day  before.  If  it  is  lumpy  cream,  of 
course,  he  does  not  get  a  fair  sample.  The  cream  should  first  be 
mixed  or  the  man  should  know  or  does  know  that  it  is  in  a  condi- 
tion, that  he  can  get  a  fair  sample.  Otherwise,  in  the  case  of 
cream  we  direct  that  the  cream  be  passed  through  a  strainer  like 
a  fine  sieve  and  all  be  put  into  a  condition  that  may  be  readily 
mixed  and  converted  into  a  homogeneous  mass.  He  keeps  the 


245 

tube  in  hot  water  so  as  to  keep  it  hot  so  that  all  of  the  cream  will 
run  out  after  the  sample.  Of  course,  if  water  stayed  in  the  tube 
it  would  tend  to  decrease  the  test  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of 
water  that  was  present.  ~No  water  should  be  allowed  to  get  in  the 
cream  sample.  Little  water  actually  goes  in,  the  tube  being 
usually  oily.  At  the  same  time  I  imagine  there  would  be  a  trace 
of  water.  When  we  take  cream  at  the  Agricultural  College-,  each 
delivery  is  sampled.  If  we  make  composite  sample,  it  is  tested 
once  a  week  or  once  in  ten  days  or  two  weeks. 

Weighing  Cream  Samples 

"It  is  necessary  to  weigh  the  cream  test  sample.  There  are 
three  causes  that  interfere  with  getting  an  accurate  sample  of 
cream. 

"  The  first  and  principal  one  is  that  the  specific  gravity  of 
cream  varies  widely  according  to  the  per  cent,  of  fat  as  compared 
with  the  sample  of  milk,  which  is  fairly  constant.  The  higher 
the  percentage  of  fat,  the  lighter  would  be  the  definite  volume  of 
cream.  That  is,  a  definite  volume  of  18  per  cent,  cream  would 
weigh  more  than  the  same  value  of  40  per  cent,  cream  and  cream 
is  a  substance  that  varies  widely  in  the  per  cent,  of  fat  from  differ- 
ent patrons  and  often  from  the  same  patron  on  different  days, 
so>  that  it  is  necessary  to  weigh  the  sample  of  cream  to  determine 
the  amount  you  put  in  the  test  bottle.  The  weight  should  be  the 
same  in  every  instance.  It  is  based  upon  18  grams.  The  pipette, 
if  you  use  one  graduated  on  the  stem,  would  not  hold  18  grams 
of  rich  cream,  if  it  held  18  grams  of  18  per  cent,  cream,  so  we 
place  the  test  bottle  on  the  scales  and  weigh  18  grams  directly 
into  the  bottle.  We  may  use  the  pipette  for  the  purpose  of  trans- 
ferring the  cream  from  the  sample  bottle  into  the  test  bottle,  but 
\vfi  weigh  it.  The  test  bottle  is  large  enough  to  hold  18  grams  iu 
any  event.  In  testing  cream,  we  do  not  need  the  pipette  at  all. 
What  we  really  need  is  an  accurate  weight  of  the  18  grams.  The 
pipette  is  only  useful  in  determining  the  proper  amount  of  milk 
to  put  into  a  test  bottle  and  it  does  not  do  it  in  the  cream  proposi- 
tion, so  we  substitute  for  the  pipette  an  accurate  weight  and  put 
that  accurate  18  grams  in  the  test  bottle.  That  is  the  only  way 
to  get  a  fair  test  of  cream.  There  are  two  other  qualities  of  cream 


246 

that  make  it  difficult  to  get  18  grains.  In  the  first  place,  the 
erearn  does  not  flow  freely  from  the  pipette.  Another  is  that 
cream  is  a  viscous  or  sticky  substance,  and  if  you  attempt  to 
agitate  itj  a  little  rapidly  just  before  drawing  your  sample,  you 
would  probably  incorporate  air  bubbles  and  of  course  the  more 
air  bubbles  you  incorporate,  the  less  the  volume  of  cream  would 
be  in  the  pipette.  I  have  heard  different  times  that  cream  was 
being  tested  without  regard  to  weight  and  have  no'  doubt  but  what 
it  has  been  practiced  to  a  great  extent  in  the  past.  Gradually  it  is 
going  out  of  practice.  You  need  the  scales  that  weigh  accurately 
to  the  tenth  of  one  gram.  The  ordinary  cream  scale  will  do  that. 
The  sample  should  be  a  very  little  over  half  an  ounce.  In  testing 
cream  we  usually  take  9  grams  in  place  of  18.  I  use  18  here  be- 
cause that  was  the  amount  we  used  at  a  former  time  and  because 
we  take  18  grams  of  milk  always.  We  get  a  sufficient  volume  of 
fat  in  9  grams  of  cream  so  that  we  can  read  it  accurately. 

"  There  is  one  other  difference  in  the  testing  of  cream  than  in 
the  testing  of  milk.  It  has  been  found  from  experience  that  we 
do  not  read  the  final  test  in  exactly  the  same  manner. 

Miniscus 

"  You  will  notice  a  curved  surface  at  the  top.  The  fat  in  the 
test  tube  is  supposed  to  be  the  same  height  on  each  side,  but  it 
has  what  we  call  the  miniscus, —  that  curved  surface  of  the  fat 
in  the  top  of  the  bottle  due  to  capillary  attraction  when  the  fat 
crawls  up  the  side  of  the  neck  a  little  all  the  way  round  the  out- 
side. In  order  that  the  test  should  agree  with  chemical  analysis, 
if  the  test  is  accurately  made,  you  would  include  that  curved 
surface  in  the  reading  because  a  small  amount  of  fat  remains  down 
in  the  test  bottle  in  this  test  and  you  include  that  in  the  reading. 
The  Babcock  test  really  does  not  send  out  quite  all  of  the  fat. 
There  is  a  small  amount  remains,  due  to  the  viscosity  of  the  fat. 
A  portion  of  the  fat  is  in  extremely  minute  globules  and  a  small 
portion  remains,  so  in  testing  milk  we  include  that  curved  surface 
in  the  reading,  but  when  we  come  to  test  cream  we  should  not  in- 
clude that  curved  surface,  quite  all  of  it  in  the  reading,  because, 
in  the  first  place,  the  diameter  of  the  neck  of  the  cream  bottle  is 
much  larger  than  the  diameter  of  the  bore  in  the  neck  of  the  milk 


247 

test  bottle.  In  the  cream  test  we  use  a  bottle  with  a  larger  bore 
in  the  neck,  so  that  the  miiiiscus  occupies  a  space  about  four  times 
as  great  in  diameter  in  the  cream  bottle  as  would  be  the  ininiscus 
in  the  milk  bottle  and  if  we  allow  the  miniscus,  it  would  be  four 
times  as  much  as  the  allowance  made  in  milk,  but  by  experiment 
we  found  that  the  amount  of  fat  that  remains  down  in  the  bottom 
of  the  cream  test  bottle  is  about  the  same  as  that  remains  down 
in  the  botttom  of  the  milk  test  bottle,  so  it  would  be  wrong  to  allow 
four  times  as  much  for  the  part  that  remains  down  in  cream  as 
in  milk;  so  we  destroy  that  miniscus  in  the  cream  test  tube  by 
placing  a  substance  over  the  top  and  make  it  flat.  Then  we  just 
read  the  actual  volume.  We  flatten  it  out  with  an  oil  that  is 
lighter,  allowing  it  to  run  down  the  side  of  the  neck  of  the  bottle 
and  it  flows  across  the  top  of  the  butter  fat  in  the  cream  test  tube 
and  remains  there  on  top.  It  is  becoming  very  common.  Then 
you  can  read  the  exact  line  of  the  fat.  We  usually  color  this  oil 
a  bright  red.  Xow,  I  want  to  state  how  we  make  up  in  regard  to 
the  fat  that  remains  down  in  the  cream  test  bottle. 

"  The  volume  of  fat  in  the  cream  test  is  much  larger  than  in 
the  milk  test  and  some  impurities  come  up  with  the  fat,  traces  of 
the  acid  that  is  used  in  making  a  test,  a  portion  of  the  watery  part 
of  the  cream  and  some  slight  insoluble  matter  comes  up  and 
occupies  a  space  mixed  with  the  fat  in  the  neck  of  the  bottle, 
so  that  amount  of  impurities  in  the  fat  we  find  by  experience  just 
about  balances  the  amount  of  fat  that  remains  down  in  the  cream 
test.  It  would  not  balance  it  in  the  milk  test,  because  of  the 
volume  of  the  fat  in  the  milk  test  bottle  being  very  much  smaller. 
These  things  we  determine  by  checking  the  tests  with  chemical 
analysis.  Acid  used  in  the  milk  test  might  be  described  as  either 
too  weak  or  too  strong  or  just  right.  The  specific  gravity  of  the 
acid  should  be  1.82  and  1.83  and  that  gives  sufficient  concentra- 
tion of  the  acid  that  will  work  best  in  making  the  test.  If  the 
acid  is  too  weak  it  will  be  indicated  by  a  pale  and  brightish  fat 
column.  It  might  or  might  not  give  too  liberal  an  allowance  of 
butter  fat.  It  might  give  you  more  fat  than  you  should  get,  or 
it  might  not  set  free  all  the  fat  and  you  might  get  a  lower  test. 
You  cannot  tell  whether  the  undissolved  matter  is  too  high  or  too 
low,  if  the  acid  is  weak.  The  acid  should  be  at  a  temperature  of 


248 

60  degrees  or  70  degrees  Fahrenheit.  That  is  the  temperature 
that  milk  in  acid  should  be  just  previous  to  mixing.  After  that, 
the  temperature  goes  right  up. 

"  In  operating  a  milk  station,  to  get  a  point  too  low  in  all  of 
them,  of  course  it  could  be  done  by  reading  it  too  low.  If  the 
reading  was  preserved,  it  could  be  done  by  adding  water  or  skim 
milk  to  the  sample  of  milk.  If  you  had  it  in  a  cold  temperature 
you  cannot  make  the  fat  column  look  right ;  it  would  not  have  it 
nice  clear  yellow  color.  The  ordinary  patron  on  inquiry  can 
learn  how  the  test  should  look.  The  patrons  usually  have  the 
privilege  of  going  right  through  the  station  and  seeing  how  the 
test  is  made  and  the  station  man  is  usually  free  to  inform  them 
of  these  facts.  I  found  that  to  be  quite  general  everywhere  and 
they  were  usually  willing  and  pleased  to  instruct  their  patrons 
as  to  how  the  test  was  made  and  allowed  them  to  see  the  test.  The 
scales  on  the  milk  test  bottle  read  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent.,  and 
on  the  cream  test  bottle,  it  reads  one-half  of  one  per  cent.  The 
smallest  graduation  on  the  scale  of  a  cream  test  is  five  times  as 
much  as  the  smallest  graduation  on  the  scale  of  the  milk  test  tube. 
The  milk  test  tube  reads  from  zero  to  eight  per  cent.  The  cream 
test  tube  reads  from  zero  to  fifty  per  cent. 

Disagreements   Betiveen    Cow    Testing   Association   and.    Station 

Tests 

"  When  the  test  is  made  by  the  man  who  tests  for  the  Testing 
Association,  compared  with  the  man  who  tests  at  the  creamery, 
there  might  possibly  be  a  small  discrepancy  which  sometimes  is 
magnified  a  great  deal,  but  which  is  almost  impossible  to  over- 
come. In  the  neck  of  the  Babcock  test  bottle  the  highest  gradua- 
tion is  8  per  cent.  Here  is  the  7  per  cent,  milk  and  then  we 
have  the  one-tenth  graduations.  The  top  surface  of  the  fat 
column  after  the  test  is  curved  and  the  man  who  makes  the  test 
should  he  read  it  at  that  point,  say  6.6,  the  top  of  the  fat  column, 
perhaps  the  bottom  of  the  fat  column  would  be,  we  will  say,  at 
the  2  per  cent,  mark,  and  he  subtracts  two  from  six,  leaving  4.6. 
That  is,  the  fat  column  would  occupy  this  space  in  the  bottle  and 
it  would  amount  to  4.6  per  cent.  Now,  the  man  who  is  doing 
thp  testing  for  the  farmer,  he  wants  to  make  the  farmer  feel  as 


249 

good  as  he  can  and  he  wants  to  get  as  high  a  reading  as  he  can. 
and  his  instructions  are  that  yon  read  to  the  very  top  this  point  on 
tihe  edge  of  the  fat  column  and  to  the  base.  Assume  he  is  very 
generous  and  lie  reads  full  up  to  that  point.  If  you  are  working 
in  a  room  and  light  comes  in  from  each  side,  there  will  be  a  dark 
band  just  above  the  edge  of  the  fat  column.  It  is  very  difficult  to 
distinguish  just  where  that  point  comes  on  the  side  of  the  glass 
upon  the  scale.  The  man  roads  to  the  very  highest  point  there, 
gets  a  little  bit  above  the  actual  top.  There  is  a  dark  band  re- 
flected; he  gets  possibly  a  trace  above  the  point  of  connection  be- 
tween the  fat  and  the  glass,  but  the  man  at  the  milk  shipping 
station  is  urged  not  to  read  too  high  and  he,  possibly  in  his 
anxiety  to  read  right,  reads  a  little  low. 

Test  Only  Accurate  to  One-Tenth  of  One  Per  Cent. 

*  .Xow,  these  tests  are  not  claimed  to  be  accurate,  as  we  say, 
only  to  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent.  The  man  at  the  farm  may  read 
maybe  one  or  two  bottles  of  the  same  milk  in  duplicate.  One 
would  test  4.6  and  the  other  4.7.'  That  is  all  that  is  claimed  for 
the  test.  You  get  within  one^tenth  of  one  per  cent.  First,  error 
in  the  graduation.  Second,  an  error  in  the  amount  of  fat  that 
comes  up  in  the  neck ;  thirdly,  errors  in  the  amount  of  impurities 
that  may  come  up  with  the  fat.  This  fat  is  not  absolutely  pure. 
A  larger  amount  of  impurities  may  come  up  in  one  than  in  an- 
other, so  that  the  test  is  one-tenth  of  one  per  cent,  accurate,  but 
that  is  very  small  on  the  whole  and  it  is  accepted  as  being  suffici- 
ently accurate  for  practical  work.  So  that  it  is  easy  for  the  cow 
tester  to  be  one-tenth  too  high  and  the  factory  man  to  be  one-tenth 
too  low.  That  will  make  two-tenths  difference.  The  dairyman 
says  then  there  is  two  points  difference,  and  it  is  a  large  amount. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  may  not  be  anything  really  that  is  very 
serious,  so  that  when  you  find  a  slight  discrepancy  on  the  milk 
test  it  does  not  establish  dishonesty;  but  on  cream  if  you  should 
find  one  or  two  per  cent.,  it  means  more  because  it  is  a  more  valu- 
able product  and  the  cream  should  be  within  one-half  of  one  per 
cent." 

In  the  course  of  the  Committee's  work,  it  encountered  many 
and  various  opinions  as  to  the  value  and  reliability  of  butter  fat 


250 

tests.  It  also  encountered  various  kinds  of  butter  fat  testers.  It 
is  fair  to  say  that  in  the  larger  and  well-managed  plants  the  Com- 
mittee is  of  the  opinion  that  the  butter  fat  test  is  carried  on 
with  adequate  equipment  and  competent  operators.  In  many  of 
the  smaller  plants,  however,  where  the  butter  fat  test  is  attempted 
to  be  used  as  a  basis  for  the  payment  of  milk,  both  the  skill  of  the 
operators,  the  equipment  and  the  methods  used  might  well  be 
subjected  to  considerable  criticism.  It  is  doubtful  if  the  alleged 
tests  in  many  small  stations,  in  the  hands  of  an  unskillful  operator, 
are  really  conducted  with  any  serious  attempt  at  accuracy. 

The  evidence  of  Professor  Troy,  however,  throws  a  useful  light 
upon  many  discussions  and  disputes  which  have  arisen  between 
the  station  tester  and  the  dairyman  in  various  parts  of  the  State. 
The  question  was  found  to  be  a  burning  one  in  certain  sections 
of  the  county  of  Wyoming,  and  dairymen  and  others  at  that  point 
presented  the  following  statement  to  the  Committee  as  presenting 
the  results  of  their  investigations  of  the  operations  of  the  butter 
fat  test  in  their  community.  This  paper  is  included  herewith, 
not  as  establishing  the  facts  asserted  therein,  a  great  many  of 
which  were  not  testified  to  under  oath,  but  as  showing  the  nature 
and  the  source  of  disagreements  in  the  matter  of  tests  and  as 
especially  illustrating  the  nature  of  the  controversy: 

Investigation  of  Variations  Between  Tests  Made  ~by  Creameries  and 
Associations 

WHEREAS,  The  patrons  of  certain  creameries  are  dissatisfied  with  the  but- 
ter-fat tests  made  at  such  creameries,  and, 

WHEREAS,  The  tests  made  by  said  creameries  show  considerable  variations 
from  the  tests  made  by  Dairy  Demonstration  Agents  in  charge  of  Cow  Testing 
Associations, 

THEREFORE,  The  Manager  of  the  Wyoming  County  Farm  Bureau  charged 
with  the  supervision  of  such  associations  in  the  county,  has  gathered  the  fol- 
lowing data  in  order  to  ascertain  the  facts  and  if  possible  determine  the  cause 
of  such  variations.  In  making  this  investigation,  the  Manager  assisted  by  Mr. 
A.  J.  Nicol  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  secured  the  following  data: 


251 


Bordens — Attica 

1.'    The  following  table  shows  how  the  tests  made  by  Mr.  Daggett  of  the 
Attica  Cow  Test  Association  compare  with  those  made  at  the  Borden  Factory. 


Owner 

W.  A.  Greene 

Wm.  Gassman. . .  . 
Frank  Hennig .... 

Conway  Bros 

Mrs.  F.  P.  Smith 
Ed.  Geitner . . 


f  Borden. . 
Daggett. 
Borden. . 
Daggett. 
Borden. . 
Daggett. 
Borden. . 
Daggett. 
Borden. . 
Daggett. 
Borden. . 
Daggett. 


Feb.    Mar.    April    May    June  July      Aug. 


3.8 
3.9 

3.8 
3.8 

39 

4.1 

4.4 

4.5 

5. 

3.9 

3.9 

4. 

4. 

4. 

3.9 

4.1 

4. 

3.9 

4.1 

4.1 

4. 

4.1 

4.4 

3.6 

3.8 

3.7 

3.7 

3.6 

3.7 

3.9 

Y7 

Y.6 

3.6 

3.6 

3.4 

3.9 

4. 

4. 

3.9 

3.7 

4. 

4.1 

3.9 

4. 

4. 

3.9 

3.8 

3.9 

4.1 

3.9 

3.7 

3.8 

3.7 

3.5 

3.6 

3.8 

4. 

3.8 

3.8 

3.7 

3.7 

3.4 

3.5 

3.9 

4. 

3.9 

4. 

3.9 

3.8 

3.8 

Note  that  in  the  above  table  the  tests  check  very  closely  and  in  the  6  herds 
for  7  months  only,  tests  varied  more  than  .2  of  one  per  cent,  and  tests  .1  of 
one  per  cent. 

In  an  interview  with  the  Manager  of  the  Borden  plant,  Mr.  Dye,  and  his 
secretary,  we  learned  that  a  duplicate  sample  had  been  sent  from  a  sample 
bottle  from  the  Varysburg  factory  owned  and  operated  by  Mr.  Geo.  Hogue. 
Such  sample  had  been  secured  from  the  factory  for  the  purpose  of  verification 
of  test  by  a  farmer.  The  tester  at  Borden's  reported  that  the  contents  of  the 
sample  were  in  such  condition  that  it  could  not  be  accurately  tested.  The 
manager  of  the  Borden  plant  stated  that  they  had  found  by  experience  that 
testing  a  15-day  sample  was  not  a  square  deal  for  the  farmer  and  for  this 
reason  the  company  had  changed  to  the  method  of  testing  samples  four  times 
a  month. 


Owner 
Clayton  Spring.  .  .  < 

Borden.  . 
Daggett. 
Borden 

Feb.  Mar.  April  May  June     July 
.  4.       4.0     4.2     4.2     4.         4.6 
.  4.1     4.2     4.3     4.2     4.2      4.3 
3  6 

Aug. 
4.3 
4.4 
3  7 

Sept. 
38 

M.  Neeley  

Stout 

3  5 

3  8 

3  6 

Borden 

36 

3  7 

Men-it  t  Reed  
Edw.  Zeches  • 

Stout  .  .  . 
Borden.  . 
Stout  .  .  . 
Borden 

3.5 
3.9 
4. 
3  6 

3.9 
4. 
4.1 
3  8 

4. 
4.3 
4.1 
3  8 

H.  Brewer  

Stout 

3  4 

3  2 

4 

Borden 

4. 

4 

Floyd  Chanler.  .  .  . 

Stout  .  .  . 
Borden 

4. 
3  7 

4. 
3  8 

4.3 

V.  D.  Morgan.  .  .  . 

Stout 

3  8 

4 

4  3 

Borden 

36 

3  9 

Smith  Bros  

Stout 

3.7 

4 

4 

D.  J.  Van  Wagnen 

Borden.  . 
Stout 

3.7 
3  7 

3.8 
3  8 

38 

Borden 

3  8 

F.  W.  Gill  

Stout 

3  6 

3  8 

3  9 

Merle  Bros  

Borden.  . 
Stout 

3.9 
4  1 

4.1 
4  2 

46 

Borden 

3  4 

3  5 

Brewer  &  Son  

Stout  .  . 

34 

36 

3  8 

Borden.. 

4. 

F.  A.  Dutton  

Stout.  . 

3.8 

4.8 

5.1 

252 


Owner                                          Feb. 
T.   r>   r^                      (  Borden.  .  .  . 

Mar.  April  May 

June     July    Aug.   Sept. 
3.7      3.9     .. 

B.  P,  Gage  
Geo.  Whipple  
Robert  Brace  

1  Stout 

37      38      43 

/  Borden 

36       38 

\  Stout  
i  Borden  

...      . 

3.7       3.7       4.1 
38      41 

1  Stout  
/  Borden  



...       3.9      4.3       4.6 
3.6      3.7     

rred  Collins  
John  Anderson  .  .  . 
Frank  Houghton 

\  Stout 

354          4 

\  Borden  
j  Stout  

3.6       3.9     .... 
39      39       45 

/  Borden  
1  Stout  

39      4 

43      43       46 

f  Borden  

3.6      3.8 

.  Wilson  

(Cheese  Fa 
Owner 
Allen  Ikeler  

: 

Thos.  Hale.  .  . 

\  Stout 

...       4.3      4.5      4.5 

ctory)  HOGUE  vs 
f  Hogue  

STOUT 
July 
15 
31 

15 
31 

"15 
31 

"is 

31 

is 

31 

is 

31 

(Association  Cow  Tester) 

Aug.        Sept.        Over 
3.4          3.5          3.9 
3.4          3.8          4.0 
3.7          3.9          4.1 
3.4          3.5 
3.4          3.8 
3.6          3.8          4  

3.6          3'7          4" 
3.6          3.7           3.9 
3.3           3.4 
3.4          3.7          4.3 

3.7           3.8          4.5 

'3^5           3^8         '3.S 
3.9 
3.6          4.9         
3.6          3.9          4.6         
4.1         
3.9          4.1 
4.             4.1           4.3 
4.1 
3.8 
3.9           3.9          4.7 
4  
3.9          4.3         .... 
4.1           4.4          4.5         

'3.5       3A      'i'.i 

3.4          3.4          3.8 
3.4          3.7          4. 
3.6          3.8          4.3 
3.5          3.5          3.7         
3.6          3.6          3.7 
3.9          4.2          3.8 
3.7          3.6           3.8 
3.8          3.8          3.9 
3.9          4.3          4.3 
Pi  7 

\  Stout  
Hogue  

Willis  Munger.  .  .  . 
William  Seth  
Bert  Langdon  .... 
Geo  Hatfield 

Stout  

'  Hogue  
Stout  

Hogue  

Stout  
Hogue  ........ 

!  Stout  ..""".. 
Hogue  

W  H  Rugg 

(  Stout 

f  Hogue 

15 
31 

is 

31 

Lowe  Bros  
Henry  Bristol  .... 
Plin  Fuller 

Stout  

Hogue  .  . 

Stout  

Hogue  .  . 

15 
31 

Stout  !  . 

Hogue 

15 
31 

Fred  Hubbard 

Stout 

Hogue 

15 
31 

Belden  &  Shaffner 
frred  Zeches  • 

Stout           .    .  . 

Hogue          .... 

15 
31 

Stout  

Hogue  

15 
31 

is 

31 
15 
31 

Ray  Shaw  

Stout  
Hogue 

Stout  
Hogue  
Stout  

4 

G.  R.  McGowan.  . 

3.6 

3.5 
4.2 

253 

Hague  Factory — Varysburg 

II.     The  following  table  shows  how  the  tests  made  by  Mr.  Daggett  of  the 
Attica  Association  compare  with  those  made  at  the  Hogue  factory,  Varysburg: 

Owner  Feb.    Mar.    April  May    June  July    Aug.  Sept. 

^  ^          /Hogue 3.3     3.35     3.55     3.5     3.35     3.2     3.45     ... 

a  \Daggett 3.6     3.7      3.65     3.9     3.5      3.6     3.55    3.7 


III.  Variations  which   occurred  when   certain  patrons  changed  from  Bor- 
den's  to  Hogue  Creamery,      (a)    Jacob   Bohn,  Attica,  N.  Y.,   sold  milk  from 
November,  1915,  to  February  15,  1916,  to  the  Bordens  at  Attica.     During  this 
time  his  tests  ran  from   3.7-3.9.     Sold  milk  from  February  16,   1916,  until 
May,    1916,  to  the  Creamery   at  Varysburg  owned  by   Mr.  Hogue.     During 
this  time  his  tests  ran  from  3  to  3.2.    The  fall  in  test  took  place  immediately 
when  the  test  was  made.     The  tests  were  made  by  Mr.  Hogue's  brother  and 
also  by  Mr.  Gibby,  Inspector  of  the  State  Department  of  Agriculture.     Being 
dissatisfied,  Mr    Bohn  withdrew  his  milk.    Mr.  Bohn  states  that  there  were  no 
fresh  cows  and  no  calves  were  being  fed.    There  were  also  no  changes  in  herd 
at  time  drop  occurred  and  that'  there  were  no  changes  in  feeding,  and  no 
changes  in  care  of  the  milk.     After  withdrawal  of  milk  from  creamery  Mr. 
Hogue  visited  Mr.  Bohn's  farm  and  said  to  Mrs.  Bo'hn  that  there  must  be 
some  mistake  in  the  testing,  and  that  as  Mr.  Gibby's  eyesight  was  poor  he 
probably  did  not  read  the  tests  correctly. 

(6)   Fred  J.  Deci,  Attica,  N.  Y. 

IV.  Sold  milk  for  about  3  months  previous  to  Feb.  15,  1916.     During  this 
time  tests  ran  4.2  in  Dec.,  4.4  in  Jan.,  1st  two  weeks  of  Feb.  4.3.     Sold  milk 
after  Fieb.  15,  1916,  until  Apr.  and  inclusive  to  Mr.  Hogue.     During  this  time 
tests  ran  3.6  last  two  of  Feb.  and  the  two  days  of  April  was  3.2.     Does  not 
know  what  March  test  was.     After  April  end  removed  milk  to  put  in  factory 
near  home  because  dissatisfied  with  test.    When  change  was  made  from  Borden 
to  Hogue  no  change  was  made  in  herd  in  feeding  or  care  and  there  were  no 
new  milch  cows. 

AVERAGE  INDIVIDUAL  TEST  OF  THE  TWENTY-FIVE  COWS  CONSTI- 
TUTING THE  HERD  AT  THE  STATE  EXPERIMENT  FARM 
AT  GENEVA  FOR  THE  YEAR  1915. 


Cow 
1  . 

Fat 
per  cent 
5.1 

Cow 
15  

Fat 
Per  cent 
5  23 

2 

6  16 

16 

5  39 

3 

6.37 

17  . 

6  29 

4 

6.03 

18  

5  79 

5 

6.28 

19  

6  66 

6 

5  97 

20 

5  93 

7 

5  73 

21  . 

5  74 

8. 

6.07 

22  

6  07 

9.  .  . 

6.75 

23..  

5  21 

10  

5.70 

24  

5.43 

11 

6  08 

25 

6  44 

12 

5  82 

13  

6.33 

Average.  . 

5  86 

14 

6  19 

254 


FAT  TESTS,  CANDOR  STATION,  TIOGA  COUNTY,  ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  COMPANY. 

April  13,   1916. 


Patron  No.    1 3.8 

Patron  No.    2 3.4 

Patron  No.    3 3.6 

Patron  No.    4 3.8 

Patron  No.    5 3.6 

Patron  No.    6 3.9 

Patron  No.    7 3.3 

Patron  No.    8 3.6 

Patron  No.    9 3.5 

Patron  No.  10 3.4 

Patron  No.  11 4.1 

Patron  No.  12 4.2 

Patron  No.  13 3.8 

Patron  No.  14  ..  3.6 


Patron  No.  15 4 

Patron  No.  16 3.7 

Patron  No.  17 4.8 

Patron  No.  18 3.4 

Patron  No.  19 4 . 

Patron  No.  20 4 . 

Patron  No.  21 4.2 

Patron  No.  22 3.6 

Patron  No.  23 3.2 

Patron  No.  24 4.1 

Patron  No.  25 4.3 

Patron  No.  26 :j . 

Patron  No.  27 3.4 

Patron  No.  28  ..  3.6 


Test  of  April  20,  1916. 


Patron  No.  1 

Patron  No.  2 

Patron  No.  3 

Patron  No.  4 

Patron  No.  5 

Patron  No.  6 


4. 

3.4 

3.6 

3.9 

3.8 

4. 


Patron  No.    7 3.4 

Patron  No.    8 3.6 

Patron  No.    9 3.6 

Patron  No.  10 3.6 

Patron  No.  11 4.2 

Patron  No.  12 4.2 

Patron  No.  13 4. 

Patron  No.  14 ..  3.6 


Patron  No.  15 

Patron  No.  16 

Patron  No.  17 

Patron  No.  18 

Patron  No.  19 

Patron  No.  20 

Patron  No.  21 

Patron  No.  22  .  . 


3.9 

3.7 

4.8 

3.6 

3.9 

3.9 

4.2 

3.5 

Patron  No.  23 3.5 

Patron  No.  24 4 . 

Patron  No.  25 4.2 

Patron  No.  26 3 . 

Patron  No.  27 3.6 

Patron  No.  28  ..  3.8 


Patron  No.    1 

Patron  No.    2 

Patron  No.    3 

Patron  No.    4 

Patron  No.    5 

Patron  No.    6 

Patron  No.    7 

Patron  No.    8 

Patron  No.    9 

Patron  No.  10 

Patron  No.  11 

Patron  No.  12 

Patron  No.  13 

Patron  No.  14  .  . 


Test  of  April  27. 

3.9  Patron  No.  15 3.3 

3.5  Patron  No.  16 3.3 

3.5  Patron  No.  17 4.5 

4.  Patron  No.  18 3.5 

4.  Patron  No.  19 4. 

3.8  Patron  No.  20 4.1 

3.7  Patron  No.  21 3.9 

3 . 5  Patron  No.  22 3.5 

3.5  Patron  No.  23 3.3 

3.8  Patron  No.  24 3.7 

4.2  Patron  No.  25 4.3 

4.  Patron  No.  26 3. 

3.8  Patron  No.  27 3.8 

3.4  Patron  No.  28 ..  3.6 


255 


Patron  No.  1 . 

Patron  No.  2 . 

Patron  No.  3  . 

Patron  No.  4 . 

Patron  No.  5 . 

Patron  No.  6 . 


Patron  No.    7 

Patron  No.    8 

Patron  No.    9 

Patron  No.  10 

Patron  No.  11 

Patron  No.  12 

Patron  No.  13 

Patron  No.  14 

Patron  No.  15 

Patron  No.  16  .  . 


Patron  No.     1 

Patron  No.    2 

Patron  No.    3 

Patron  No.    4 

Patron  No.    5 

Patron  No.    6 

Patron  No.    7 

Patron  No.    8 

Patron  No.    9 

Patron  No.  10 

Patron  No.  11 

Patron  No.  12 

Patron  No.  13  .  .  .' 

Patron  No.  14 

Patron  No.  15 

Patron  No.  16 

Patron  No.  17 

Patron  No.  18  .  . 


Patron  No.    1 

Patron  No.    2 

Patron  No.    3 

Patron  No.    4 

Patron  No.    5 

Patron  No.    6 

Patron  No.    7 

Patron  No.    8 

Patron  No.    9 

Patron  No.  10 

Patron  No.  11 

Patron  No.  12 

Patron  No.  13 

Patron  No.  14 

Patron  No.  15 

Patron  No.  16 

Patron  No.  17 

Patron  No.  18 

Patron  No.  19  ..  3.9 


Test  of 

May  29. 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

17.  . 

3 

.6 

3.7 

Patron 

No. 

18  

4 

A 

3.4 

Patron 

No. 

19  

4 

3.8 

Patron 

No. 

20  

4 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

21  

3 

.9 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

22  

3 

A 

3.8 

Patron 

No. 

23  

3 

.8 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

24  

3 

.8 

3.6 

Patron 

No. 

25  

3 

.2 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

26  

3 

.7 

3.7 

Patron 

No. 

27  

3 

.7 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

28  

3 

.5 

3.3 

Patron 

No. 

29  

4 

3.4 

Patron 

No. 

30  

3 

.8 

3.5 

Patron 

No. 

31  

4 

4   ^ 

Test  of  t 

June  27. 

4.3 

Patron 

No. 

19.  . 

3 

.8 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

20  

4 

.7 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

21  

4 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

22  

3 

.0 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

23  

4 

.4 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

24  

4 

.1 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

25  

4 

.2 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

26  

4 

.2 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

27  

3 

.9 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

28.  ., 

3 

.6 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

29  

3 

.7 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

30  

3 

.9 

3.3 

Patron 

No. 

31  

4 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

32  

3 

.9 

3.6 

Patron 

No. 

33  

4 

.1 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

34  

4 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

35  

3 

.8 

3.9 

- 

Test  of 

July  6. 

4.6 

Patron 

No. 

20.  . 

4 

.7 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

21  

4 

.1 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

22  

4 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

23  

4 

.(i 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

24  

4 

.5 

4.4 

Patron 

No. 

25  

4 

.a 

4.3 

Patron 

No. 

26  

4 

.2 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

27  

3 

.1) 

4.1 

Patron 

No. 

28  

3 

.8 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

29  

4 

.4 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

30  

4 

4. 

Patron 

No. 

31  

3 

.0 

3.6 

Patron 

No. 

32  

3 

.6 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

33  

4 

3.5 

Patron 

No. 

34  

3 

.9 

4.2 

Patron 

No. 

35  

4 

3.9 

Patron 

No. 

36  

4 

3.8 

Patron 

No. 

37.. 

4 

.5 

250 

HEKRY  AKENS,  called  as  a  witness,  testified: 

"  I  am  superintendent  of  the  above  stations.  I  have  not  yet  got  a 
license.  I  wrote  for  a  license  to  the  company.  This  is  my  first 
experience  in  New  York.  I  make  the  butter  fat  test.  I  learned 
that  at  Hackettstown,  N.  Y.,  in  March,  1916.  Before  that  I 
worked  in  a  milk  station  in  Pennsylvania,  but  never  made  butter 
fat  tests.  Inspector  Ruddy  of  the  New  York  Board  of  Health 
sent  me  to  Campbell  and  I  got  the  place  up  here.  I  lived  in 
Pennsylvania  a  year  and  three-quarters.  Before  that,  in  New 
York  city  and  before  that  in  Germany.  I  was  not  in  the  milk 
business  in  Germany.  I  clerked  in  a  hardware  store.  In  New 
York,  I  was  doing  everything,  but  not  in  the  milk  business.  I  got 
one  man  with  me,  Mr.  Richards,  in  the  Candor  factory.  He  has 
been  there  a  long  time ;  he  is  an  old  gentleman.  I  get  $50  a 
month.  When  I  saw  Mr.  Campbell,  he  said  I  should  go  to 
Hackettstowii  and  learn  how  to  make  butter  fat  tests.  That  is 
all  I  did  in  Hackettstown,  but  that  was  in  March. 

Mr.  Ward. — How  do  you  make  a  fat  test  ? 

Mr.  Arena. — It  is  marked  on  the  glass.  Take  that  much  milk 
in  the  bottle  and  put  acid;  I  don't  know  what  kind  of  acid;  the 
company  sends  it;  it  was  there  when  I  came.  I  don't  know  that 
the  quality  of  the  acid  affects  the  result.  I  take  a  sample  once  a 
week  out  of  the  weighing  vat.  Dump  them  out  together  and  stir 
them  up.  I  take  each  man's  sample  the  same  day.  I  put  this 
sample  in  pint  bottles  .and  after  I  get  through,  I  test.  I  got  ever\ 
bottle  with  the  names  written  on  it.  Then  I  take  the  test  bottles, 
it  is  marked  on  the  glass;  I  don't  know  how  much  and  put 
the  milk  in  the  test  bottle  and  put  that  much  acid  in  and  put  it 
in  the  Babcock  Tester,  run  it  for  five  minutes,  then  I  put  hot 
water  down  the  neck. 

Mr.  Ward. — -What  do  you  do  that  for  ? 

Mr.  Arens. — That  butter  fat  comes  up.  Then  I  run  it  for 
three  minutes  and  I  put  water  again  in,  hot  water,  pretty  near  fill 
bottle  -and  run  for  two  minutes  so  that  all  the  butter  fat  comes 
up.  After  that,  it  is  marked  to  show  how  much  butter  fat  it  is." 


TEST,  BOONVIKLE  'STATION,  ONEIDA  COUNTY,,  ALEXANDER 
CAMPBELL  COMPANY. 

April 


Dairyman 
N0>  i  —  Boch  

1st  test  2i 
3.4 

id  test  3rd  test  4 
3.3          3.4 
3.4          3.4 
3.7          3.6 
3.6          3.4 
4.             3.8 

3.7          3.7 
4.            4.1 

thtest  A 
3.4 
3.4 
3.6 
3.4 
3.9 

3.8 
4. 

verage 
3.4 
3.4 
3.6 

No  2  —  C  apron 

3  3 

No  3—  Capron  B  A 

36 

No  4  —  Sheperd,  C 

4. 

No.  5  —  Roberts,  R.  H  

39 

Oapron  A  C. 

September 
3  5 

Sheperd,  C. 

4 

4. 

Capron,  B.  A.               .    .    .  . 

Roberts  

TVIarcy  

3.8 

3.8 
3.6 
3.9 

4. 
3.6 
4.1 

4.1 
3.7 
4.2 

3.9 
3.6 
4. 

'Marcv,  P 

3  4 

Hall  &  Loston 

4 

Mr.  MERRY,  station  superintendent  testified : 

"  I  attend  to  the  weighing  can  and  take  out  a  sample  with  a 
cone-shaped  dipper.  I  do  not  .make  the  composite  test;  just  take 
a  sample  of  it ;  I  make  a  test ;  do  it  four  times  a  month,  and  then 
average  the  four  tests. 

Mr.  Ward. — How  do  read  the  miniscus,  that  curve  that  is  in 
the  tube  ? 

Mr.  Merry. — I  read  it ;  if  it  is  a  bad  curve,  I  split  it  and  add  it 
to  the  circle ;  I  don't  read  the  highest  and  lowest  point.  We  split 
the  curve  on  the  bottom  and  add  it  to  the  top  ;  take  the  two  together 
and  it  makes  it  about  balance,  you  know.  One  sags  up  and  other 
sags  down.  We  take  the  average  of  the  curves.  In  testing  I 
should  take  three  or  four  tablespoonfuls  in  the  dipper.  The  water 
is  always  all  shook  out  of  the  dipper  before  I  take  a  sample." 

HIGH  GROUND  DAIRY  COMPANY  TEST,  WOODS  CORNERS  STATION 

ON  D.  L.  &  W. 

PRATT  TOWNSEND,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  am  the  station  superintendent.     We  take  in  milk  and  ship 

it;  -make  buttermilk  and  pot  cheese.      The  buttermilk  is  made 

from  skim  milk.     It  is  pasteurized,  then  soured  and  churned.     I 

get  $60  a  month  and  my  house  rent  and  milk  and  butter.     The 

9 


258 


house  is  separate  from  the  station.  I  have  another  man  beside 
myself.  I  pay  the  man  that  is  with  me  now  $48.  The  flush  is 
over  now,  (July,  1916).  I  worked  in  creameries  before  in  Penn- 
sylvania. I  worked  for  the  Rockdale  Creamery  in  Cherry  Valley 
seven  years  and  learned  to  test  butter  fat  there.  They  made 
casein  and  the  National  Milk  Sugar  Company  made  milk  sugar. 
I  have  all  the  records  of  the  station  for  two  years. 


Date 
June  1 
June  2. 
June  3. 
June  4 


The  Station  Record 


Pounds  Cans  milk 
received     shipped 


13,039 
13,480 
13,434 
13,370 


90 

90 

116 

84 


Buttermilk 
shipped 
12 
12 
15 
15 


June  1 
June  2 
June  3. 
June  4 


Cream  Pot  cheese 
shipped       shipped 


Cans  milk 

Date 

Received 

shipped 

June  5  

12,891 

127 

June  6  

12,506 

116 

June  7  

13,339 

130 

June  8  

13,039 

101 

June  9  

13,739 

103 

June  10  

12,909 

103 

June  11  

12,706 

100 

June  13  

12,657 

112 

June  14  

12,580 

115 

June  15  

12,534 

127 

July  1  

10,946 

106 

July  2  

10,632 

93 

July  3  

10,435 

106 

July  4  

10,738 

93 

JulyS  

10,486 

107 

July  6  

9,808 

87 

July  7  

8,972 

80 

JulyS  

8,848 

82 

July  9  

92 

July  10  

9,048 

80 

July  11  

8,889 

89 

July  12  

8,570 

100 

July  13  

8,210 

79 

Buttermilk 
shipped 
15 
15 
15 

Cream 
shipped 
6 
3 

Pot  cheese 
shipped 

"(5 

10 

2 

10 
10 
10 

5 
5 

4 

5 
6 

8 

7 

16 

25 

4 

22 

20 

3 

5 

1 

12 

13 

1 

18 

2 

16 

2 

19 

12 

3 

18 

2 

2 

13 

259 

The  above  record  is  inserted  as  a  fair  illustration  of  the  change 
in  the  volume  of  receipts  of  milk  during  the  months  of  June  and 
July  in  many  dairy  sections,  caused  principally  by  change  in 
dairy  production  at  these  particular  seasons  of  the  year.     It  will 
be  observed  that  receipts  of  13,000  pounds  on  June  1st  had  fallen 
to  8,210  pounds  on  July  13th.     Mr.  Townsend  continues:  "  We> 
had  32  dairies  coming  to  that  plant.     I  take  a  sample  of  the 
milk  every  day  and  make  a  composite  sample  and  test  it  at  the 
end  of  the  week.     I  take  the  sample  out  of  the  weigh  vat  after  it 
is  mixed,    so   I   usually  have   seven   samples   in   the   composite 
sample.     I  try  and  take  a  sample  every  day.    -Some  days  I  skip. 
Twice  a  week  I  make  a  sediment  test  and  a  temperature  test  and 
that  is  generally  two  days  that  I  don't  get  a  sample  for  the  com- 
posite test.     I  probably  take  samples  for  five  days  in  the  com- 
posite test.     After  I  have  taken  them,  I  put  them  in  a  jar  and 
presently  take  them  out  and  test  them.     I  have  a  glass  tube,  a 
pipette  that  we  buy  from  the  dairy  company  in  Norwich,  and 
then  we  send  them  to  Geneva  and  have  them  marked  with  the 
State  brand.     I  take  a  sample  in  this  pipette  from  the  composite 
sample,  put  it  into  the  test  botttles,  measure  it  in  and  add  sul- 
phuric acid,  which  we  buy  at  Norwich.     The  Norwich  people  get 
it  from  Little  Falls.    They  are  shook  up  and  put  in  the  tester  and 
run  for  three  minutes  first,  then  two  minutes,  and  then  about  one 
minute  again.     During  those,  times  when  I  am  running  it,  I  add 
water  to  bring  the  fat  up  into  the  neck.     It  is  probably  about  140 
or  150.     Then  I  take  it  out  and  read  the  fat.     The  neck  of  the 
bottle  is  graduated  from  1  to  10  per  cent.     I  test  24  samples  ^at 
once  in  the  tester  and  use  steam.     I  put  the  tests  in  a  book.     In 
that  book,  the  tests  for  June  are  as  follows : 

No.  of  patron 

1 

2.. 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

30 

31.  . 


1st  test 

2nd  test 

3rd  test 

4th  test 

3.3 

3.3 

2.9 

•:k  3.2 

3.4 

3.4 

3.4 

3.4 

3.6 

3.6 

3.7 

3.6 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

3.2 

4. 

4.1 

4.2 

4.1 

3.8 

3.8 

3.7 

3.8 

3.7 

3.8 

3.6 

3.7 

3.6 

3.6 

3.3 

3.5 

3.5 

3.4 

3.4 

3.4 

3.9 

3.9 

4.3 

4. 

3.4 

3.3 

3.2 

3.3 

260 


Mr.  Townsend. — "  The  sixth  dairyman  is  Grove  Curtis.  His 
cows  are  black  and  white;  They  look  like  Holsteins.  I  tested  five 
times  for  May." 


No.  of  patron 
(6)  Grove  Curtis. .  . 
30.. 


1st  test     2nd  test 
4.                 4. 
3.9         

3rd  test 
4. 

4th  test 
3.9 

5th  test 
4.4 

April,  1916 

3.7              3.6 

3.7 

3.6 

3.7 

3.9              3.5 

3.5 

3.6 

3.5 

4.2              4.1 

3.9 

3.9 

4. 

March,  1916 

3.8              3.8 

3.8 

3.8. 

3.8 

4.1              4.1 

4.1 

4.1 

February,  1916 

3.6              3.6 

3.6 

3.6 

3.6 

4.3              4.2 

4.3 

4.2. 

4.3 

January,  1916 

36              3.6 

3.6 

3.8 

3.6 

4.                 4. 

4.5 

4.3 

4.4 

Mr.  Townsend. — "  Patron  No.  1  has  a  small  dairy.  His  name 
is  Hubert  Post.  He  lives  a  quarter  of  a  mile  away  from  the  sta- 
tion. Patron  No.  6  lives  five  or  six  hundred  feet  from  the  station. 
Neither  of  them  keep  pure  breds-.  We  buy  and  pay  entirely  by 
this  butter  fat  test;  Borden  scale;  barn  score  added.  All  our  milk 
is  B  milk." 

BORDEN  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  TESTS  AT  NORWICH,  N.  Y. 
GROSVENOR  J.  Ross,  called  and  sworn,  testified : 

"  I  am  employed  in  the  Borden's  factory  at  Norwich  as  milk 
tester  since  it  was  built  in  1900.  Our  testing  apparatus  consists 
of  a  Babcock  equipment,  24  bottle,  centrifugal  machine,  consisting 
of  pipette,  acid  measure,  hydrometer  for  testing  the  solids  not 
fat  and  pipette  for  measuring  the  milk,  and  10  per  cent,  butter 
fat  test  bottles  o-perated  by  steam.  My  duty  is  to  test  all  the  milk 
delivered  at  that  station  for  butter  fat.  From  each  daily  delivery, 
I  take  a  sample  from  each  40  quart  can  after  stirring  the  40  quart 
can  and  dipping  it  and  take  a  proportionate  sample  out  and  put- 
ting it  into  a  cup  and  then,  taking  a  small  dipper  made  for  the 


261 

purpose  and  taking  an  equal  amount  from  each  can,  first  putting 
it  into  a  copper  cup  holding  about  a  quart  and  there  it  is  mingled 
and  from  this  there  is  taken  a  small  amount,  enough  for  one 
sample,  say  176  cubic  centimeters.  It  is  not  convenient  to  take 
this  sample  from  the  weigh  can  because  there  is  a  cover  on  the 
weighing  part  and  it  retards  the  work.  You  would  get  the  same 
sort  of  a  sample  from  the  weighing  fat  as  from  the  cans  if'  you 
took  every  particle  of  milk  from  the  previous  dairy  out  of  the 
can.  If  you  did  not,  you  would  get  a  mingle  from,  the  previous 
dairy.  We  have  a  jar  with  each  patron's  name  on  and  each  day 
that  jar  is  opened  and  the  sample  put  in.  It  is  mingled  and  sealed 
again.  It  is  a  fruit  jar  with  a  bale  top  and  a  rubber  gasket,  a 
glass  top  and  the  lever  is  thrown  down  thereby  sealing  the  can 
tight  each  day  after  the  sample  is  put  in,  to  prevent  evaporation. 
We  put  a  preservative  in  the  sample  jar  to  prevent  its  getting  sour. 
The  can  is  set  up  until  the  time  comes  for  testing.  We  test  four 
times  per  month.  We  are  not  infallable.  There  is  a  possibility 
of  error,  but  it  does  not  often  happen.  The  following  are  some 
of  the  tests  from  our  records  you  ask  for.  I  do  not  give  you  the 
six-tenths  and  seven-tenths;  just  the  tenths." 

Patron  1st  test  2nd  test  3rd  test      4th  test      Average 

No.    5 3.5  3.65  3.7  3.7 

No.  10 3.8  3.65  3.65  3.8  3.7 

No.  15 3.8  3.8  3.9  3.65  3.8 

No.20 3.6  3.5  3.6  3.45  3.5 

Boos 4.1  3.8  3.8  3.9 

Collier 3.3  3.65  3.8  3.6  3.8 

Franklin 3.8  3.8  3.8  3.8  3.8 

McNitt 3.2  3.4  3.3  3.2  3.3 

Dimick 3.7  3.5  3.4  3.35  3.5 

Dunkle 3.8  4.2  4.  3.8  4. 

May 

No.    5 3.6  3.6  3.55  3.45  3.6 

No.  10 3.8  4.5  3.9  3.6  3,8 

No   15 4.1  4.  4.  3.75  4. 

No.20 3.5  3.65  3.65  3.4  3.6 

Boos 3.75  3.75  3.8  3.3  3.7 

Collier 3.85  3.8  3.9  3.75  3.8 

Franklin 3.9  3.95  3.8  3.65  3.8 

McNitt 3.1  3.4  3.5  3.3  3.3 

Dimick 3.4  3.8  3.45  3.35  3.5 

Dunkle..  3.8  4.2  4.2  4.2  4.1 


262 


Patron 
No.    5  .  . 

4 

1st  test 
3  4 

June 
2nd  test     J 
3  45 

Jrd  test      4 
3  4 

th  test        i 
3  4 

Average 
3  4 

No.  10  

3  8 

3  8 

3  9 

3  8 

3  8 

No.  15  

3  75 

3  6 

3  75 

3  85 

3  7 

Boos  

3  4 

3  5 

3  45 

3  3 

3  4 

Collier  

3  8 

3  8 

3.85 

3  8 

3  8 

Franklin  

3.8 

3.8 

3.8 

3  8 

3.8 

McNitt 

3  5 

3  35 

3  4 

Dimick 

3  5 

3  5 

3  65 

3  6 

3  6 

Dunkle.  . 

3.9 

4. 

4.1 

4.1 

4. 

Solids,  not  fat 

No.  20  above 8.53  8.70  8.58 

Collier 8.7  8.74  8.88 

Total  solids 
No.  20  above 12.03          12.31          11.98 

ISAAC  W.  EUSHMOEE  &  COMPANY  TESTS  AT  NORWICH,  CHENANGO 

COUNTY 

C.  H.  AGAN,  called,  testified : 

"  I  make  the  butter  fat  test  twice  a  month.  I  take  an  individual 
sample  twice  a  month.  We  pay  the  same  prices  as  the  Bordeii 
Condensery  at  Norwich,  except  10  cents  per  hundred  more  in 
June  and  July,  and  20  cents  per  hundred  more  in  November  and 
December.  When  I  make  a  test,  I  set  it  down  and  the  date  I 
make  it  in  this  book.  Patron  No.  1  is  Newton  Eldred.  We  only 
make  a  test  every  two  weeks.  Patron  No.  2  is  William  Doolan; 
Patron  No.  3  is  W.  H.  Lewis;  Patron  No.  4,  G.  H.  Boyd;  Patron 
No.  5,  Davis  Brothers;  Patron  No.  6,  Harry  Hadlock;  No.  16  is 
J.  R.  Mundy;  No.  25  is  Cleveland  &  McNitt.  I  take  a  sample 
out  of  the  weigh  can  and  have  a  composite  test  every  morning.  I 
do  not  have  any  4  per  cent,  milk  delivered  there  in  April,  May  or 
June,  1916.  I  carry  that  composite  test  for  fifteen  days.  That 
is  what  my  boss  told  me,  to  make  two  tests  a  month.  Mr.  Baker 
of  the  Agricultural  Department  made  the  test  on  June  29th.  I 
asked  him  if  he  had  just  as  soon  test  and  he  said  he  would.  We 
figure  up  and  pay  on  the  first  test  for  two  weeks  and  then  the 
second  test.  There  is  no  averaging  of  our  tests.  We  take  a 
sample,  hold  it  each  day  for  fifteen  days  and  then  at  the  end  of  the 
fifteen  days  we  test  that  composite  sample  for  butter  fat  and  pay 
according  to  the  reading  of  that  test  without  any  averaging  at  all. 
I  then  put  that  down  on  the  sheet,  send  the  sheet  to  New  York,  and 


263 

at  the  end  of  the  month  the  checks  are  issued.  I  copy  the  report  I 
send  to  New  York  from  this  book.  I  get  the  checks  and  give 
them  to  the  patrons.  The  agricultural  agent  just  made  that  test 
to  see  how  my  milk  was  running.  The  test  book  shows  as  follows : 

April 

Patron's  No.                                                           1st  test  2nd  test 

3.5  3.4 
3.4  3.3 
3.3  3.2 

3.6  3.5 

3.6  3.5 
3.3  3.2 

3.7  3.8 
3.9  3.8 


3.5  3.4 
3.4  3.5 
3.1  3.1 

3.6  3.6 

3.6  3.6 
3.4  3.3 
3.8  3.7 

3.7  3.6 


3.5  3.4 

3.4  3.4 
3.1  3.2 

3.5  3.5 

3.5  3.5 
3.3  3.2 

3.6  3.6 
3.6  3.6 


SHEFFIELD     FARMS,     SLAWSON-DECKER     COMPANY      TEST     OF 
LUTHER  M.  HASTINGS'  HERD,  STAMFORD,  DELAWARE  COUNTY, 
YORK 

1916 

Test  Price  per  cwt. 

January 4.33  $2  10£ 

February 4.3  1  99 

March 4.3  1  98* 

April 4.2  1  76 

May 4.2  1  65 

June 4.23  1  42| 

Barn  score  above  68. 


No.    1 

No.    2    

No.    3  

No.    4  

No     5 

No.    6 

No.  16 

No.  25  

No.    1 

May 

No.    2. 

No.    3  

No.    4  

No.    5  

No.    6  

No.  16 

No.  25 

No.    1  .  . 

June 

No.    2  .  . 

No.    3 

No.    4 

No.    5  

No.    6  

No.  16  

No.  25  .  . 

264 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON-DECKER  COMPANY  TEST, 
HILL,  SciroiiARiE  COUNTY 

J.  M.  JAYCOX,  called,  testified: 

"  I  operate  the  receiving  station  of  the  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson- 
Decker  Company  at  Eichmond  Hill.  We  buy  milk  on  the  butter 
fat  basis.  I  have  here  my  tests  from  July  20,  1916,  to  April  4, 
1915.  We  have  73  patrons  on  the  July  list  at  Richmond  Hill. 
There  is  a  premium  of  five  cents  a  hundred  for  the  months  of 
April,  May  and  June,  and  twenty  cents  per  hundred  for  the 
months  of  July,  August  and  September,  if  milk  is  delivered  at 
a  temperature  of  50  or  under.  We  ship  our  milk  in  cans  and  the 
milk  brought  to  the  factory  this  morning  leaves  at  3  :40  this  after- 
noon and  gets  into  New  York  about  11 :30  to-night.  Goes  to 
130th  street  where  it  is  mostly  pasteurized  and  bottled  and  sold 
from  wagons.  We  voluntarily  advanced  the  price  ten  cents  in 
April ;  we  have  a  composite  test.  About  50  per  cent  of  the  cows 
are  grades,  Jerseys  and  Holsteins,  and  our  tests  are  as  high  as  any- 
where in  the  State. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr,  Warthmore  says  that  your  tests  are  deliber- 
ately exaggerated  to  a  high  figure  in  order  to  make  it  impossible 
for  a  man  with  an  honest  test  to  do  business. 

Mr.  Jaycox. —  I  don't  test  it.  It  would  be  very  easy  to  read 
two  or  three  points  on  the  glass.  I  tested  milk  twelve  years 
myself  and  I  know  what  I  did.  I  gave  them  just  what  was  coming 
to  them  to  the  best  of  my  ability.  I  always  gave  the  doubt  to  tlio 
farmer.  There  is  a  curve  in  the  milk  test;  you  can  give  or  take 
one- tenth  in  reading  a  test  and  be  perfectly  ho-nest.  Our  instruc- 
tion is  to  give  it  to  the  farmers  always  so  as  to  give  him  a  liberal 
test.  We  .think  that  better  than  to  send  the  sample  to  the  Agri- 
ture  Department  and  have  it  read  one-tenth  less  at  the  department. 
Any  tester  will  tell  you  that  you  can  read  a  test  one-tenth  either 
way.  The  Cow  Testing  Association  is)  the  only  way  I  know  to 
check  the  factory.  The  dairymen  at  our  plant  can  take  a  sample 
from  the  same  sample  we  test.  The  cow  tester  can  go  right  to  our 
plant  and  test  at  the  same  time  if  he  wants  to." 


265 


Per  cent  fat 

,     Per  cent  fat 

Dairyman's  name 

July  10th 

July  20th 

1.  Glot  

4.5 

4.6 

2.  Moot  

4.2 

4.2 

3.  Van  Patten  

5. 

5.1 

4.  Ostrand  

4. 

4.2 

5.  Davenport  

5.1 

5. 

6.  Conro  

4.7 

4.6 

7.  Van  Voorhees.  .  . 

4.2 

4.3 

8.  Moot  

4.2 

4.2 

9.  Fraser  

4.8 

4.8 

10.  Mrs.  Moot  

4.4 

4.4 

11.  Snyder  

4.4 

4.4 

12.  Farrell  

4.4 

4.3 

13.  Davis  

4.6 

4.5 

14.  Fraser  

4.5 

4.5 

15.  Harris  

4.6 

4.5 

16.  Snyder  

4.4 

4.6 

17.  Morgan  

4.4 

4.5 

18.  Pratt  

4.9 

4.7 

19.  Ostrander  

4.3 

4.1 

20.  Smith  

4.6 

4.7 

21.  McMahon  

4.3 

4.3 

22.  Empie  

3.7 

3.8 

23.  Sherbeck  

4. 

4.1 

24.  Patrick  

4.8 

4.8 

25.  Harmes  

4.6 

4.7 

26.  Van  Dorn  

4. 

4.4 

27.  Lockwood  

4.6 

4.6 

28.  Basner  

4.3 

4.4 

29.  Wharton  

4.2 

4. 

30.  Warner  

4.1 

4.2 

31.  Lape  

4.4 

4.6 

32.  Palmer  

4.1 

4.2 

33.  Moot  &  Son  .  .  .  . 

4.2 

4.3- 

34.  Fox  

4.4 

4.4 

35.  Lape.  .  :  

4.2 

4.4 

36.  Babcock  

4 

4.1 

37.  Houston  

4.3 

4.4- 

38.  Fraser  

4.4 

4.3: 

39.  Fox  

4.4 

4.3: 

40.  Smith  

4.5 

4.3 

41.  Van  Patten  

4.4 

4.4 

73.  Fink  

4.4 

4.4 

1916  AVERAGES 

June  Test 

Patron's 

number 

Average 

1  

4.3 

2.  

4.1 

3  

4.76 

4  

4.03 

5  

4.8 

6  

4.6 

7.  

4. 

8  

4.16 

9  

4.53 

10.  

4.36 

11  

4.4 

12..  . 

4.33 

266 


Patron's 

number  Average 

18 4.86 

19 4.2 

22 3.9 

26 3.85 

30 4.2 

31 4.33 

44 4.6 

41 4.56 

73 3.93 

72 4.33 

May  Test 
Patron's 

number  Average 

1 4.5 

2 4.13 

3 ' 5.06 

5 4.63 

6 4.33 

7 3.96 

8 4.26 

9 4.6 

10 4.16 

11 4.23 

12 4.36 

13 4.5 

14 4.4 

15 4.66 

23 3.90 

26 3.83 

38 5.96 

42 4.13 

73 4.43 

April  Test 
Patron's 

number  Average 

1.         4.4 

2...      4.2 

3 5. 

5 4.5 

6 4.5 

7 3.93 

8 4.26 

9 4.5 

10 4.13 

11 4.33 

12 4.26 

13 4.53 

14.           4.36 

IS.! 4.66 

26 3.8 

38 3.96 

42 4.23 

43 4.53 

61 4.96 

72 4.2 

73...                 4.05 


267 


SHEFFIELD  FARMS  TEST  AT  SOUTH  KORTWRIGHT,  DELAWARE 
COUNTY,  DAIRY  AVERAGE  OF  H.  K.  ROSE,  GRADE 
JERSEYS 


January  1,  1913,  to  December  31,  1914 


Month 
January 

Pounds 
18  330 

Price 

$2  24 

Test 
4  8 

Value 
$405  34 

February              

17  ,  307 

2  00 

5  04 

370  49 

March         

19,494 

85 

4  94 

382  64 

April   

22,575 

83 

4  84 

409  67 

Tyiay 

30  450 

56 

4  9 

469  69 

June 

29  ,  360 

50 

4  7 

433  20 

JUly                                              

22,715 

74 

4  87 

387  98 

August           

16,022 

2  21 

5  14 

349  43 

September 

14  592 

2  35 

5  24 

341  48 

October 

16  015 

2  54 

5  01 

404  98 

November 

14  140 

2  52 

5  04 

354  67 

December      

15,844 

2  66 

5  14 

421  15 

Total  production  

236,844 

Total  proceeds  of  milk 

$4  730  72 

Average  test. 

4  98 

Average  price..  . 

$2  08 

BORDEN  COMPANY  TESTS  AT  DELHI,  DELAWARE  COUNTY 

First  Second  Third  Fourth  Aver- 

Name  week  week  week  week  age 

Amos,  J.  W 4.6  4.7          4.8  4.8  4.7 

Amos,  A.  G 4.6  4.5          4.5  4.5  4.5 

Anderson 4.6  4.6          4.6         4.6 

Blake 4.8  4.8          4.8  4.8  4.8 

Every 4.4  4.4          4.4  4.4  4.4 

Dodd 5.1  5.1          5.5  5.5  5.3 

Russell 5.  5.2          5.2  5.1  5.1 

Bruce 4.2  4.3          4.3  4.3  4.3 

Snyder 4.6  4.6          4.7  4.7  4.7 

Yeomans 4.4  4.3          4.4  4.4  4.4 

Amos 4.9  4.9          4.9  4.9  4.9 

Every,  R.  L 4.4  4.2  4.3 


F.  X.  BAUMERT  &  COMPANY    TESTS,  ANTWERP,  JEFFERSON 
COUNTY,  136  PATRONS 

Mr.  GIBBS,  the  superintendent,  testified : 

"  The  milk  we  receive  is  made  into  Neuchatel,  miniature  cream, 
Pimento,  Camembert,  Lunch,  Dinar,  Isigny,  Brie,  Limburger; 
all  made  out  of  whole  milk  except  the  Isigny,  which  is  made  out 
of  skim  milk,  and  Crown  Brand  Neuchatel  made  out  of  part  skim. 
We  employ  a  well  known  dairyman  to  make  the  tests, —  a  local 
resident  in  whom  we  think  the  dairymen  have  confidence.  We 


268 

pay  him  so  much  a  week  just  for  coming  to  the  factory  and  making 
the  test. 

Ai  composite  test,  drip  test,  of  the  136  dairymen  who  brought 
milk  to  our  factory,  June  1,  1915,  showed  butter  fat  content  of  .35. 
This  drip  test  is  taken  as  the  milk  is  being  taken  in  every  morning. 
We  test  the  milk  for  butter  fat,  each  dairy  twice  a  month.  On 
that  date,  the  indvidual  tests  were  as  follows: 

Patron's 

number  Test 

15 3.3 

42 3.4 

30 3.5 

23 3.6 

10 3.7 

3 3.8 

1 4.4 

June  15,  drip  test,  3.4. 

Individual  test 

1 2.9 

9 3. 

3 : 3.1 

26 3.2 

36 3.3 

39 3.4 

15 3.5 

12 3.6 

4 3.7 

1 3.8 

July  1st,  drip  test,  3.4. 

Individual  test 

2    .  2.9 

3 3. 

11 3.1 

30 3.2 

32 3.3 

26 3.4 

21 3.5 

8 3.6 

1 3.7 

July  18,  composite  drip  test,  3.3. 

Individual  test 

1 2.6 

2.8 

2.9 

10 3. 

17 3.1 

27 3.2 

33 3.3 

25 3.4 

20 3.5 

8 3.6 

3.7 

3.8 


269 

Mr.  Ward. — What  price  did  this  man  whose  milk  tested  2.9  get  ? 

Mr.  Gibbs.— He  would  receive  for  June  milk  $1.30  per  hundred, 
less  15  cents  deduction.  That  is  five  points  below.  The  June  price 
was  $1.45  and  his  test  brought  it  down  to  $1.30.  The  man  whose 
milk  tested  2.6  has  not  got  his  pay  for  it  yet.  We  had  three  pa- 
trons below  3,  one  of  2.6,  one  of  2.8,  and  one  of  2.9.  We  don't 
ignore  those  low  tests,  but  pay  them  according  to  their  price.  He 
got  $1.21  on  the  2.6  test  for  June  milk. 

MUTUAL  MCDERMOTT  DAIRY  CORPORATION    TESTS  AT  CANTON, 
ST.  LAWRENCE  COUNTY 

JAMES  DUNDON,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified: 

"  We  pay  the  same  price  for  B  and  C  milk.  We  make  a  com- 
posite test  twice  a  month.  We  have  56  dairies.  Give  all  the  dairies 
the  same  test. 

Mr.  Ward. — What  do  you  do  with  the  curve  in  the  test  tube  ? 
Mr.  Dundon. — The  curve? 

Mr.  Ward. — We  do  not  understand  that  the  butter  fat  lies  level 
in  the  test  tube,  but  it  has  got  a  curved  surface. 

Mr.  Dundon. — Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. — What  do  you  do  with  the  curve  ? 

Mr.  Dundon. — Divide  it. 

Mr.  Ward. — What  do  you  do  with  it  when  you  are  testing? 
Suppose  you  are  testing  milk  and  you  had  that  curve  in  the  test 
bottle,  what  would  you  do  to  it  to  know  how  much  to  give  the 
dairyman  ? 

Mr.  Dundon, — I  don't  really  understand  what  you  mean. 

Mr.  Ward. — The  cream  doesn't  lie  level  in  the  test  tube,  you 
understand  that  it  has  got  a  curved  surface,  the  butter  fat  in  the 
test  tube. 

Mr.  Dundon. — Conies  up  in  it  ? 

Mr.  Ward. —  Yes.  Which  do  you  allow  for?  What  do  you 
allow  for  when  you  are  testing  ? 


270 

Mr.  Dundon. —  Read  it  on  the  bottle. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Which  side  do  you  read  of  it,  the  low  side  or  the 
high  side  ? 

Mr.  Dundon. —  Read  between. 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON-DECKER  COMPANY    TESTS  AT 
M ALONE  STATION 

Mr.  BURGDUFF,  superintendent,  called  before  the  Commit- 
tee, testified: 

"  We  test  three  times  a  month  and  average  the  three.  As  the 
tester  reads  them  he  copies  them  off  in  this  sheet  and  I  take  it  in 
my  possession  in  order  that  when  he  makes  the  next  test,  he  does 
not  refer  to  the  last  one.  This  is  the  test  book.  No.  1  is  J.  P. 
Hutchins,  test  July  28th,  3.7;  test  on  July  10,  3.9;  test  on  July 
19th,  3.7.  That  gave  him  3.8. 

Mr.  Ward. —  If  he  had  two  3.7  and  one  3.9,  divided  by  three., 
will  it  give  3. 8? 

Mr.  Burgduff. —  No,  sir.  The  real  average  would  have  been 
3.766.  Mr.  Hutchins  got  no  pay  for  the  two-thirds  of  a  point  of 
butter  fat.  John  Childs  is  dairyman  ~No.  2.  If  a  dairyman  should 
test  3.3  something  like  that,  we  would  give  him  3.4. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Why  would  you  do  that,  to  encourage  him  ? 
Mr.  Burgduff. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is,  if  a  man  was  low,  it  was  read  high ;  if  a 
man  was  high,  it  was  read  low  ? 

Mr.  Burgduff. —  "No.  Dairyman  No.  2  averaged  3.766  and  we 
allowed  him  3.8,  although  his  average  was  3.766.  Our  prices  are 
based  on  3.8  and  we  try  to  bring  them  up." 

Average  Tests  —  July  —  /Sheffield  Farms,  Slaw  son-Decker 
Company  Station  at  M alone 

3.8;  3.9;  3.9;  3.9;  4;  3.9;  3.9;  3.7;  3.7;  3.7;  3.8;  3.9;  3.8; 
3.9;  3.7;  3.8;  3.9;  3.9;  3.7;  3.7;  3.7;  3.8;  3.9;  3.4;  3.8;  3.8;  3.8; 
4;  3.8;  3.9;  3.7;  3.4;  3.8;  3.7;  3.7;  3.7;  3.9;  4.5;  3.8;  3.9;  3.8; 
3.8;  4.2;  3.9;  3.9;  3.8;  3.9;  4;  4;  3.8;  4.1;  3.9;  3.9;  3.9;  3.8; 


271 

3.9  ;  3.8  ;  4.4 ;  4.4 ;  3.7 ;  3.8  ;  3.8  ;  3.9  ;  3.9  ;  4.4 ;  3.9  ;  3.9  ;  3.7 ;  3.8  ; 
3.8;  3.9;  3.8;  3.9;  3.7;  3.9;  3.9;  3.7. 

F.  Gillette's  Test 

July  28 4.8 

July  19 4.3 

July  10 4.6 

That  gives  4.5|.    He  was  paid 4.5 

R.  F.  STEVENS  COMPANY  TEST,  CLINTON,  ]ST.  Y. 
Mr.  MYEHS,  station  superintendent,  called,  testified: 

"  I  test  the  milk  four  times  a  month,  take  samples  and  use  a 
Babcock  tester.  I  take  a  sample  from  the  weigh  can.  That  was 
the  handiest  and  best  and  most  satisfactory  way.  I  don't  know 
anything  about  the  drip.  I  tested  it  that  afternoon.  Dairyman 
No.  1,  Brackett  &  Kidney.  I  made  four  tests  of  Brackett  &  Kid- 
ney's milk  in  July.  They  were  as  follows:  3.7;  3.9;  3.7;  3.8. 
The  average  was  3.77  and  that  was  what  they  were  allowed.  They 
allow  everything  over  one-half  a  point.  If  it  is  3.75  they  allow  3.8. 
If.it  is  under  3.75,  they  allow  it  3.7.  Dairyman  No.  7  had  3.95 
and  they  allowed  him  4.  They  allow  them  a  full  point  for  one-half 
and  take  the  less  than  half.  Our  price  for  June,  1916,  at  Clinton, 
N.  Y.,  for  dairies  scoring  68  was  $1.19  for  all  milk  up  to  3.7.  Ten 
cents  was  added  for  milk  over  that,  so  that  a  man  producing  4.7 
milk  got  the  same  price  as  the  man  producing  3.8  milk,  and  the 
man  producing  3.3  milk  got  the  same  price  as  the  man  producing 
3.7  milk.  Prior  to  April,  we  paid  3  cents  a  point  up  and  down, 
but  in  April  the  prices  were  changed  to  the  present  scale." 

SCBIBA  CENTER  CREAMERY  COMPANY 

FLOYD  LINDALL,  manager,  called  before  the  Committee,  tea- 
fied: 

"  This  company  is  owned  by  the  farmers.  We  separate  it  and 
ship  the  cream  to  New  York,  some  to  R.  F.  Stevens,  some  to 
Beake's  and  some  to  the  High  Ground.  We  make  the  skim  milk 
into  casein.  The  patrons  get  paid  for  whatever  the  milk  tests  in 
butter  fat,  Mr.  Isabell  does  the  testing.  We  get  about  30,000 
pounds  a  day  or  a  little  better.  We  separate  all  the  milk,  pasteur- 
ize the  cream  and  ship  it  and  make  the  skim  milk  into  casein.  We 


272 

set  tlie  separator  so  it  will  run  about  41  or  42  per  cent,  to  get  what 
we  want  in  cream  and  then  we  bring  it  up  by  adding  enough  milk. 
Our  tests  generally  agree  with  the  purchasers'  tests.  The  patrons- 
get  all,  except  about  five  cents  per  pound;  that  goes  to  the  com- 
pany for  manufacture.  O.  S.  Burt  was  one  of  our  patrons.  In 
April  he  had  55.99  pounds  of  butter  fat  and  was  paid  for  it  at  the- 
rate  of  .4401  or  26.50  for  fifteen  days'  milk.  In  the  last  fifteen 
days  he  had  5,287  pounds  and  61.32  pounds  of  butter  fat  and  ha 
was  paid  at  the  rate  of  .4577  for  it.  He  got  45  cents  per  pound 
for  his  butter  fat  in  April.  Many  go  better  than  that.  May,  they 
got  .39.  June  he  was  paid  .3931  for  butter  fat.  We  pay  this- 
way,  it  is  according  to  the  milk,  how  much  milk  a  man  delivers.. 
One  man  delivers  774  pounds  of  milk  and  he  had  30.96  pounds  of 
butter  fat.  Another  man  had  1,714  pounds  of  milk  and  59.99- 
pounds  of  butter  fat.  We  get  the  ratio  and  multiply  it  by  the- 
number  of  pounds  of  milk." 

SCRIBA  CREAMERY  TEST,  APRIL 

Dairyman's  name  1st  test  2nd  test 

3.9  3.5 

4.1  4.1 

3.7  3.6 
3.5  3.7 

3.8  3.8 
3.3  3.5 


3.4  3.7 

4.4  4.1 
3.9  4. 

3.5  3.4 

3.6  3.8 
3.5  3.6 


3.5  3.7 
4.1  4.2 
3.7  3.7 

3.6  3.5 
3.5  3.5 
3.5  3.6 


3.7  3.8 

4.1  4.4 

3.7  3.7 

3.5  3.8 

3.4  3.5 

3.5  3. a 


Waugh 

Guyette 

Parker 

Fredenburg 

Bateman  

May 

Waugh  -.. 

Parker  

Ye&r 

Fredenburg 

Guyette 

Bateman 

June 

WaugK.  . 

Parker 

Year 

Fredenburg 

Guyette 

Bateman                 .... 

July 

Waugh           

Parker  

Year       

Fredenburg  

Guvette  .  . 

273 


Mr.  Lindall. —  Mr.  Dick  has  got  a  dairy  mostly  red  and  white. 
His  tests  were  as  follows : 

April,   first  half..  , 3.8 

second  half 4.2 

May,    first  half 4.1 

second  half 4 . 

June,    first  half 3.9 

second  half 4.2 

July,     first  half 

second  half 4.2 

Mr.  Ludd's  tests  were  as  follows: 

April,    first  half 

second  test 3.4 

May,    first  test 3.8 

second  test 4.1 

June,    first  test 4 . 

second  test 4 . 

July,     first  test 3.7 

second  test 3.8 

Mr.  Wilcox's  tests  were  as  follows : 

April,    first  test 4.4 

second  test 4.1 

May,  first  test 4.4 

second  test 4.5 

June,  first  test 4.4 

second  test 4.4 

July,  first  test 4.3 

second  test 4.3 

B.  G.  Jones  tested : 

1st  test    2ndte^t 

April..  4.3  4.3 

May 4.6  4.4 

June 4.2  4.4 

July 4.1  4. 

Taylor : 

April..  3.8  3.8 

May 3.6  3.8 

June 3.8  3.7 

July 3.7  3.T 

Prior : 

April..  4.6  4.1 

May 4.1  4.4 

June 4.2  4.4. 

July 4.1  4.4 

Griswold : 

April..  4.1  4.3 

May 4.3  4.3 

June 4.2  4.1 

July 4.3  4.4 

Brown  i 

April..  4.5-  4.9 

May 4.8  3.6 

June 3.5  3.2 

July 3.3  3.4 


274 
Murphy  : 


1st  test  2nd  test 

April 4.1          3.9 

May 3.8          4. 

June 4.             3.8 

July 3.9          4. 

Rector  : 

April 3.6          3.1 

May 3.6          3.5 

June 3.7          3.5 

July 3.6          3.7 

Rapelye : 

April 3.7          3.4 

May 3.4          3.6 

June 3.7          37 

July 3.8         3.9 

Richardson : 

April 3.7         3.7 

May 4.1          3.7 

June 3.6          3.6 

July 3.9  4. 

Davis : 

April 4.5  4.4 

May 4.6  4.5 

June 4.5  4.6 

July 4.4  4.3 

Manwarring : 

April 3.7  3.6 

May 3.6  4.2 

June 4.4  4.4 

July 4.3  4.3 

Toy: 

April 3.6  3.5 

May 4.0  3.9 

June 3.8  3.7 

July c 3.7  3.7 

Lauton : 

April 3.7  3.8 

May 4.1  4. 

June 3.8  3.9 

July 4.  4. 

Allen: 

April 3.7  3.9 

May 4.4  4.2 

June 4.4  4.4 

July 4.4  4.1 

Mr.  Lindall. —  Allen's  test  for  March  was  as  follows : 

March 3.2  3.5 

February 3.6  3.6 

January 4.5  4.1 


275 

INTERNATIONAL  MILK  PRODUCTS  COMPANY,  COOPERSTOWN,  N".  Y. 

Tests. 

Mr.  HOBEY,  manager,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
"  Our  tests  are  made  by  the  chemist.  He  does  not  know  whose 
milk  he  is  testing.  All  he  ever  sees  is  the  number.  We  buy  in  all 
our  plants  on  the  butter  fat  basis.  We  changed  from  a  flat  rate  to 
a  butter  fat  basis  because  the  milk  kept  getting  poorer  every  year, 
lower  in  fat,  because  they  were  all  breeding  for  milk  and  didn't 
pay  any  attention  to  what  the  cows  tested  and  we  found  we  were 
getting  milk  that  was  below  the  State  standard. 

TESTS,  1914 
September 

First  Second 

Patron                                               test  test         Average 

No.  1 3.6  3.2            3.4 

Kinney 3.9  3.7            3.8 

October 

No.  1 3.4          3.1  3.25 

Kinney 3.7          3.5  3.6 

November 

No.  1 3.2          3.2  3.2 

Kinney 3.4          3.5  3.45 

December 

No.  1 3.2  3.1  3.15 

Kinney 3.6  3.5  3.55 

Jarvis 2.8  3.  2.9 

Barnum 4.6  4.3  4.45 

Van  Dusen 3.8  3.5  3.65 

Blencoe 3.8  3.4  3.6 

Clark 4.5  4.  4.25 

Moakley 4.8  4.1  4.45 

Pershell 4.3  4.4  4.35 

Stokes 3.9  3.8  3.85 

Ekler 4.  4.2  4.1 

Cunningham 4.2  5.6  4.9 

Smart 4.3  4.8  4.5 

Hopkins 4.8  4.2  4.5 

Clark 4.5  4.2  4.35 


2T6 


1915 

January  First  Second 

Patron  test  test  Average 

No.  1 3.  3.2  3.1 

Kinney 3.4  3.6  3.5 

Jarvis 3.2  3.1  3.15 

Barnum 4 .  ....  4 

VanDusen 3.4  3.7  355 

Blencoe -3.3  3.4  3.55 

Clark 3.3  3.7  3.5 

Moakley 3.8  3.  3.4 

Pershell. 3.8  38 

Stokes 3.4  4.1  3.75 

Ekler 3.9  4.1  4. 

Cunningham 4.3  4.  4.15 

Van  Duzen 3.6  3.7  3 !  65 

February 

No.  1 3.2  3.1  3.15 

Kinney 3.2  3.  3.1 

Jarvis 3.  3.4  32 

Nichols 2.8  2.8  2.8 

Moakley 3.  3.4  3.2 

April 

No.  1 3.2  3.5  3.25 

Jarvis 3.3  3.2  3. 25 

Ingalls 3.6  3.1  3.35 

Moakley 3.4  3.5  3.45 

Cunningham 3.6  3.2  3.4 

May 

No.  1 3.3  3.1  3.2 

Jarvis 3.3  3.5  3.4 

Blenooe 3.3  3.2  3.25 

Clark 3.4  3.4  3.4 

Moakley 3.4  3.4  3.4 

Cunningham 3.  3.4  3.2 

June 

No.  1 3.4  3.2  3.3 

Jarvis 3.4  3.5  3.45 

Ingalls 3.4  3.8  3.6 

Blenooe 3.3  3.6  3.45 

Moakley 3.3  3.2  3.25 

July 

No.  1 3.3  3.3  3.3 

Jarvis 3.2  3.4  3.3 

Ingalls 3.5  3.3  3.4 

Blencoe 3.4  3.5  345 

Moakley 3.4  3.3  3.35 

Cunningham 3.4  3.5  3. 45 

August 

No.  1 3.4  3.2  3.2 

Jarvis 3.3  3.3  3.3 

Ingalls 3.7  3.7 

Blencoe 3.8  3.8  3.8 

Moakley 3.6  3.6  3.6 

Cunningham 3.8  3.9  3. 85 

September 

No.  1 3.5  3.5  3.5 

Kenney 4.1  ....  4.1 

Jarvis 3.4  3.8  3.6 

Blencoe 3.8  3.7  3.75 

Moakley 3.8  3.8  3.8 

Cunningham 4.1  4.2  4.15 


27 


Mr.  Hobey. —  Beginning  October,  1915,  we  based  our  price  on 
three  per  cent,  milk  with  three  cents  additional  for  each  additional 
point,  and  ten  cents  less  for  the  barn  score  less  than  68. 


1915  TESTS 
October 

First  Second 

Patron  test  test  Average 

No.  1 3.5  3.4  3.45 

Jarvis 3.6  3.3  3.45 

Blencoe 3.4  4.  3.7 

Clark 4.1  4.1  4.1 

Moakley 3.7  4.  3.85 

Cunningham 4 .  4.3  4.15 

November 

No.  1 3.8  3.2  3.5 

Jarvis 3.2  3.5  3.35 

Blenco 3.7  3.2  3.45 

Moakley 4.  4.  4. 

1916  TEST 

January 

First  Second 

Patron  test  test  Average 

No.  1 3.4  3.3  3.55 

Jarvis 3.6  3.3  3.45 

Blencoe 3.3  4.  3.65 

Moakley 4.1  4.1  4.1 

Cunningham 4.2  4.  4.1 

February 

No.  1 3.3  3.4  3.3 

Jarvis 3.2  3.2  3.2 

Blencoe 3.1  3.  3.05 

Moakley 3.8  4.1  3.95 

Cunningham 4.1  3.5  3.8 

March 

No.  1 3.3  3.7  3.5 

Jarvis 3.3  3.2  3. 25 

Blencoe 3.  3.  3. 

Clark 3.9  3.9  3.9 

Moakley 4.  3.9  3.95 

Cunningham 3.5  3.2  3.35 

April 

Blencoe 3.2  3.1  3.15 

Moakley 3.5  3.5  3.5 

No.  1 3.5  3.6  3,55 

Jarvis..  3.4  3.2  3.3 


278 

LAURENS  MILK  TO  THE  SAME  STATION 
1916 
April 

First  Second 

Patron  test  test 

Crause 4.2  4.3 

St.  John 4.6  4.6 

Parish 4.  4. 

Knight 4.4  4.4 

Platz , 4.  4. 

Comstock 4.2  4.2 

Brightman 4.3  4.1 

Anderson 4.1  4.3 

Eldred 4.1  4.1 

Williams 4.1  42 

Cook 3.8 

Webster 4.8  4.7 

Hotaling 3.9  .... 

Cranston 4.5  4.4 

Hand 4.3  4.1 

Tully 4.6  4.2 

Harrison 4 .  4 . 

Straight 4.6  4.5 

Markmaster 4.5  4.4 

Dyer 4.5  4.5 

Anderson 4.5  4.3 

Richards 4.5  4.4 

Jordan 4.3  4.4 

Hand 4.5  4.5 

Baker 4.  4. 

Herring 3.8  3.8 

Green 4.2  4.2 

McClelland 4.5  4.5 

Perkins  Brothers'  April  test:  3.8;  3.7;  May,  3.8;  3.8;  June, 
3.8 ;  3.8 ;  July,  3.9 ;  3.7.  Holmes,  April,  3.5 ;  3.5 ;  May,  3.5 ;  3.5 ; 
June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.6;  3.6. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is  quite  a  uniform  test  that  a  dairy  should 
test  three  months  there  in  succession  the  same  tiling,  don't  you 
think  so? 

Mr.  Haight. —  Yes,  it  seems  to  run  uniform. 

Mills  &  Saxton,  April,  3.7;  3.6;  May,  3.7;  3.6;  June,  3.7;  3.7; 
July,  3.8 ;  3.8.  Short,  April,  3.3 ;  3.3 ;  May,  3.3  ;  3.4;  June,  3.5  ; 
3.5;  July,  3.6;  3.8.  Sherman,  April,  3.6;  3.6;  May,  3.5;  3.5; 
June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.5;  3.6.  Oliver,  April,  3.4;  3.3;  May,  3.4; 
3.5;  June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.5;  3.4.  Crawford,  April,  3.6;  3.5; 
May,  3.4;  3.6 ;  June,  3.6 ;  3.6 ;  July,  3.8 ;  3.89.  Woodcock,  April, 
3.6;  3.6;  May,  3.7;  June,  3.6;  3.6;  July,  3.6.  Lingner,  April, 
3.5;  3.4;  May,  3.4;  3.5;  June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.5;  3.6.  Craw- 


279 

ford,  3.6  ;  3.5  ;  May,  3.4;  3.6  ;  June,  3.6  ;  3.6  ;  July,  3.8  ;  3.9.  Dub- 
bins, April,  3.6;  3.6;  May,  3.5;  3.5;  June,  3.6;  3.6;  July,  3.6; 
3.6;  July,  3.6;  3.8.  Sargent,  April,  3.6;  3.6;  May,  3.6;  3.5; 
June,  3.6;  3.5;  July,  3.5;  3.5.  Cobb,  April,  3.6;  3.5;  May,  3.5; 
3.5;  June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.6;  3.6.  Dorsweet,  April,  3.4;  3.4; 
May,  3.3;  3.5;  June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.6;  3.6.  Simonson,  April, 
3.8;  3.8;  May,  3.8;  3.9.  Monaghan,  Aipril,  3.4;  3.3;  May,  3.3; 
3.3;  June,  3.4;  3.4;  July,  3.5;  3.7.  Meaney,  April,  3.6;  3.5; 
May,  3.4;  3.5  ;  June,  3.6 ;  3.5 ;  July,  3.6 ;  3.8.  Daily  &  Thompson, 
April,  3.5;  3.5;  May,  3.4;  3.5;  June,  3.5;  3.5;  July,  3.6;  3.8. 
Woodrow,  April,  3.7;  3.7;  May,  3.6;  3.6;  June,  3.6;  3.6;  July, 
3.7;  3.7.  Wilson,  May,  3.3;  3.4;  June,  3.4;  3.4;  July,  3.6;  3.6. 
Cole,  April,  3.5;  3.5;  May,  3.5;  3.6;  June,  3.5;  3.6;  July,  3.7; 
3.8.  Borden,  April,  3.5;  3.6;  May,  3.5;  3.6;  June,  3.6;  3.6; 
July,  3.7 ;  3.8.  Jewell,  April,  3.9 ;  3.9 ;  May,  3.9 ;  3.8 ;  June,  3.8 ; 
3.8 ;  July,  3.8 ;  3.9.  E.  M.  Jewell,  April,  4.2 ;  4.2 ;  May,  4.3 ;  4.3 ; 
June,  4.4;  4.5;  July,  4.5;  4.7.  Kilts,  April,  3.5;  3.5;  May,  3.4; 
3.4;  June,  3.4;  3.4;  July,  3.5;  3.5. 

Mr.  Ward. —  There  are  four  months,  April  to  July,  with  eight 
tests,  every  one  of  them  either  3.4  or  3.5  composite  test.  Is  that 
usual  ? 

Mr.  Haight, —  Not  ordinarily,  no. 

Mr.  Ward. — Well,  now,  here  is  Sargent's  eight  tests  from  April 
to  July,  all  3.6  or  3.5. 

Mr.  Haight. —  Depends,  of  course,  on  the  condition  of  the  dairy, 
when  they  are  coming  in  and  all,  I  suppose.  Some  cows  keep 
freshening  and  it  makes  a  difference. 

MAX  BLUM'S  FACTORY,  PHOENIX  MILLS,  OTSEGO  COUNTY,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  NANINGA,  superintendent,  called  before  the  Committee, 
testified : 

"  I  run  the  Max  Blum's  milk  factory  at  Phoenix  Mills  and  make 
the  tests.  I  make  the  tests  twice  a  month.  I  have  a  record  of  my 
tests,  as  follows : 


280 


March  1-15,  1916. 

Patron  No.  Test 

1 3.2 

2 3.6 

3 3.5 

4 3.4 

5 4.4 

8 3.4 

9 3. 

11 3. 

17 4.5 

33 4.8 

March  15-31 

1 3.2 

2 3.2 

3 3.4 

4 3.2 

5 4.4 

8 3.3 

9 3.7 

11 3. 

17 4.6 

18 3.7 

33 4.6 

April  1-15 

1 3. 

2 3. 

3 3.4 

4 4.6 

5 3.2 

8 4  . 

9 3.4 

12 3.2 

13 3.2 

14 3.4 

15 4. 

April  15-30 

1 3, 

2 3. 

3 3.4 

4 4.7 

5 3.2 

8 3.8 

9 3.4 

11 3.3 

12 3.2 

13 3. 

14 3.2 

15 ; 4. 

16 3.2 

May  1-15 

1 3.1 

2 3.2 

3..., 3.4 

4 4.7 

5 3. 

6 4. 

8 4. 

9 3.2 

11 3*.5 

12 3.5 

13 3. 

14 3.2 

15..  4. 


281 

May  16-31 

Patron  No. 

Test 

1  

3. 

2  

3. 

3  

3. 

4  

4.4 

5  

3. 

6  

4.2 

7  

3.8 

8  

3.5 

9  

3.5 

10  

3.2 

11  

3.2 

12  

3.3 

13  

4.1 

14  

3.1 

15  

3.4 

June  1-15 

1  

3.1 

2  

3.2 

3  

3.3 

4  

4.4 

5  

3.2 

7  

4.4 

8  

4. 

9  

3.5 

10  

3.10 

11  

3.4 

12  

3.4 

13  

3.3 

14  

3.5 

15  

3.5 

16  

3.6 

June  16-30 

1  

3. 

2  

3.5 

3  

3.4 

4  

4.5 

5  

3. 

6  

4.4 

7  

4.2 

8  

3.4 

9  

3.4 

10  

3. 

11  

3.2 

12  

3.2 

13  

4. 

14  

4. 

15  

4.4 

16  

3.4 

Mr.  Ward. —  Now,  there  is  No.  15,  the  first  half  of  June  was 
3.5  ;  the  last  half  of  June  was  4.4. 

Mr.  Naninga. —  He  got  new  cows  in  by  that  time.    If  I  remem- 
ber, he  told  me  so. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  accounted  for  his  increase  in  nine  points  ? 
Mr.  Naninga. —  Yes. 


Test  July  1-15 


1  

31 

2 

3  5 

3 

3  4 

4.  .  . 

4  5 

5. 

3  2 

7  

4  4 

8  

4  3 

9  

3  5 

11  

34 

12  

3.1 

13 

3  4 

14 

3  4 

15 

4  3 

16 

3  5 

17  

3  5 

July  16-31 

1.  . 

3  4 

2  

3  6 

3  

..    .    .                                                 ...           3.7 

4  

4.8  and  5 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  did  you  come  to  make  two  tests  ? 

Mr.  Naninga. —  We  paid  him  4.9. 

Mr.  Ward.—  Who  is  that  ? 

Mr.  JSTaninga. —  Hans  Hansen. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  some  of  his  milk  test  5  ? 

Mr.  Naninga, —  Yes,  and  some  4.8.    First  it  tested  4.8. 

Mr.  Ward. — Don't  you  keep  a  regular  composite  test  ? 

Mr.  Naninga. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  don't  test  the  composite  test  twice  ? 

Mr.  Naninga. —  'No,  sometimes  we  take  a  sample  out  of  the  can. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Now,  are  there  any  others  you  paid  a  little  higher 
or  gave  them  a  higher  test,  except  Hansen  ? 

Mr.  Naninga. —  No. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  did  you  come  to  give  it  to  Hansen  ? 

Mr.  Naninga, —  Because  he  told  me  I  made  a  mistake  in  his 
test  and  he  wanted  to  have  his  test  or  to  take  the  milk  some  place 
else;  that  little  bit  of  money  that  amounted  to  I  rather  keep  a 
patron  than  lose  him.  That  was  in  June,  but  I  told  him  a  little 
bit  later  again,  because  Mr.  Hansen  always  thinks  we  beat  him. 


283 
BORDEN  MILK  COMPANY  TEST  AT  CHERRY  VALLEY,  JULY,  1916. 


Patron 

Test 

1 

3  6 

2  

3.8 

3  

4. 

4  

3.6 

5  

3.9 

6  

4. 

7  

3.6 

8  

3.7 

9  

3.9 

10  

3.9 

June,  1916 

i.; 

3.7 

2  

3.7 

3  

4.1 

4  

3.6 

5  

3.9 

6  

4. 

7  

3.6 

8  

3.7 

9  

4. 

10  

4.1 

May,  1916 

1.. 

3.5 

2  

3.7 

3  

3.7 

4  

3.6 

5  

3.7 

6  

3.7 

7  

3.6 

8  

3.6 

9  

3.6 

10  

4. 

April 

1.. 

3.7 

2  

3.7 

3  

3.8 

4  

3.6 

5  

3.6 

6  

3.7 

7  

3.8 

8  

3.7 

9  

3.7 

10... 

3.8 

284 


BOKDEN  MILK  COMPANY  TEST,,  EDMESTON,  OTSEGO  COUNTY 


Averages 

Dairyman 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

Arnold  

3.5 

3.5 

3.3 

3.4 

3.6 

Ainsworth  

3.6 

3.8 

3.8 

3.7 

3.8 

Barrett  

4.1 

4.2 

3  5 

3  9 

Bancroft  

3.6 

3.6 

3  4 

3  5 

Boynton  

3.9 

3.8 

3.8 

3.7 

Wilson  

3.7 

3.7 

3  5 

3  5 

R.  R.  Boynton  

3.5 

3.4 

3.3 

3.4 

W.  B.  Boynton  

4.1 

3.9 

3.7 

3.7 

Bennett  

3.6 

3.4 

3.3 

3.3 

Bentwell  

3.9 

3  8 

3  7 

3  8 

Dooley  

4.1 

4. 

3.7 

3.9 

Johnson  

3.6 

3.5 

3.5 

3.4 

Hood  

4.4 

3.9 

3  9 

4. 

Jacobs  

4.5 

4.6 

4  5 

4.3 

Johnson  

3.7 

4. 

4  2 

4.1 

Peck  

4.1 

4.3 

4.3 

4.3 

Parker. 

3  9 

4  1 

3  9 

3  9 

West   . 

3  6 

3  5 

3  5 

3  6 

Truesdale  . 

3  8 

3  9 

4  1 

4  2 

Truesdale  No.  2 

3  6 

3  7 

3  5 

3  6 

Talbot  

3  9 

3  7 

3  8 

3  8 

; 

BOEDEN  MILK 

COMPANY, 

BUBLINGTON    FLATS,    JlJLY 

Average 

Average 

Burdick  

3.4 

Houston  . 

3.3 

Bixby  

3.4 

Johnston  . 

3.4 

Burdick  

3.4 

Jones  .... 

3.4 

Branch  

3.4 

Kohn.... 

3.4 

Chapin  

3.5 

Link  .... 

3.7 

Chase  

3.5 

Lewis  .... 

3.3 

Taylor  

3.6 

Michaels  . 

3.7 

Pitch  

3.4 

Perkins  .  . 

3.3 

Pitch,  F-  A  

3.5 

Parker.  .  . 

3.7 

Croton  

3.4 

Richards  . 

3.3 

Garfield  

3.4 

Talbot.  .  . 

3.5 

Hall  

3.4 

Chase  .  .  . 

3.3 

Merritt  

3.5 

Telf  ord  .  . 

3.3 

House  

3.8 

Wright.  .  . 

3.6 

Mr.  CAKLTON,  superintendent,  testifies: 

"There  is  only  five  points  difference  in  all  those  thirty-two 
dairies  at  Burlington  Flats,  on  those  averages  from  3.3  to  3.8. 
Those  tests  are  all  a  composite  test;  sample  taken  daily  and  tested 
once  a  week." 
June,  1916,  Averages,  Burlington  Flats      June,  1916,  Averages,  Burlington  Flats 


Bixby 

Burns 

Williams .  . . 
Chapin .... 

Chase 

Chase,  C.  H 
Chase,  S.  W 
Pitch .  . 


4. 

3.7 

4. 

3.8 

3.8 

3.4 

3.7 

3.4 


Pitch,  F.  A.. 

Martin 

Martin,  C.  D 

Garfield 

Hall. 

Merritt 

Hinds .  . 


3.9 

4. 

4. 

3.9 

3.8 

3.8 

3.6 


285 

G.  N".  SEDAN,  MORAVIA,,  ELGIN  CREAMERY  COMPANY  TEST  AND 

PRICES 

G.  ~N.  SLOAN,  called,  testified: 

"  I  live  in  Moravia  and  run  the  creamery.  We  make  up  the 
milk  for  the  patrons  into  cheese  all  summer  and  butter  in  the 
winter.  We  make  the  cheese  for  a  cent  and  a  half  a  pound  and 
the  butter  for  three  cents  a  pound.  We  sell  our  product  to  D.  B. 
Stewart  &  Company,  wholesale  grocers,  on  the  basis  of  the  average 
"New  York  market.  I  find  out  what  the  average  is  from  the  mar- 
ket papers,  '  The  Journal  of  Commerce/  '  Commercial  Bulletin,' 
and  Urner  &  Barry's  Prices.  They  put  out  a  price  current.  Stew- 
art &  Company  take  their  price  from  the  papers.  They  pay  us 
one-eighth  under  average  '  Fancy  Quotations,'  as  reported  in  the 
papers.  The  last  quotation  was  17%,  so  we  got  17'  3/8.  In  July, 
our  patrons  got  35  cents  a  pound  for.  butter  fat.  That  would  be 
$1.40  per  hundred,  about,  for  milk.  We  test  the  milk  and  buy 
on  the  butter  fat  tests.  We  make  two  tests  a  month  from  a  com- 
posite sample.  Our  tests  were  as  follows : 

Westfield 3.65  Cashin 3.8 

Schaefer 3.6  Pratt 4. 

Kirkendoll 3.7  Rowe 3.4 

Wood 3.6  Turner 4.3 

Sherman 3.9  Erb 4.3 

Ennis 3.5  Jennett 4 . 

Adams 4.  Hobart 4. 

Kirkendoll.  B 3.8  Dunnie 3.7 

Wright 3.8  Erniis 3.5 

Wheeler 3.8  Harris 3.4 

Devine. ..  3.2  Dugan 3.6 

Dran 3.  Wrisley 4.8 

Marcus 3.7  Myers 3.7 

Morris 4.3  Brockway 4.2 

Bennett..  3.7  === 


MERRELL-$OULE    COMPANY'S    TESTS,    FREWSBURG,    CHAUTAUQUA 
COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  BI-MONTHLY,  1915 

Patron  Xo.  1:  3.35;  3.4;  3.7;  4.1;  3.8;  4.3;  —  j  — ;  — ;  3.6;  3.5;  3.3; 
3.5;  3.1;  2.83. 

Same  patron,  May  to  September  twice  a  month:  3.3;  3.1;  3.2;  3.2; 
3.2;  3.45. 

Patron  No.  1:  4.0;  4.0;  4.35;  4.5;  4.25;  4.55;  4.5;  4.55  4.25;4.4; 
4.1;  — ;  — ;  — ;  — ;  — ;  — ;  — ;  — ;  3.5;  3.45;  3.65;  3.65;  3.9.  (The 
last  3.9  being  the  test  from  September  1-15,  1916.) 

Patron  No.  11,  beginning  September  1,  1915,  made  bi-monthly  for  the  year: 
4.6;  5.0;  5.2;  5.15;  5.4;  5.35;  4.5;  4.2;  4.6;  4.0;  4.0;  4.4;  3.9.  (The 


286 


3.9  test  being  March  16-31,  1916.)  4.2;  4.0;  4.3;  4.25;  4.5;  4.4;  4.3; 
4.5;  4.5;  4.3;  4.85.  The  last  test  being  September  1-15,  1916.) 

Patron  No.  30,  commencing  September  1,  1915,  bi-monthly:  3.9;  4.1; 
4.3;  4.6;  4.5;  4.4;  4.6;  4.1;  3.9;  4.4;  4.0;  3.75;  3.15;  3.5;  3.4;  3.2 
(being  the  last  test  for  April,  1916);  3.45;  3.45;  3.5;  3.55;  3.6;  3.55;  3.7; 
3.7;  3.8. 

Patron  No.  29,  beginning  September  1,  1915,  bi-monthly  for  twelve  months: 
4.1;  4.4;  4.5;  4.3;  4.35;  4.2;  4.1;  4.3;  4.2;  4.1;  4.0;  4.15;  3.95;  4.0; 
3.8;  3.9  (the  last  being  the  test  of  April,  1916);  4.0;  3.8;  3.9;  3.7;  3.85; 
4.0;  4.0;  4.15;  4.2. 

BORDEN  COMPANY'S  TEST  AT  FRANKFORT,  HERKIMER  COUNTY, 
N.  Y.,  MONTH  OF  SEPTEMBER,  1916 

Average  Test 

4.1;  4.1;  4.0;  3.8;  3.7;  3.8;  4.1;  3.4;  3.9;  4.2;  4.1;  4.2;  4.3;  4.6; 
4.0;  4.5;  3.7;  3.9;  4.4;  4.4;  4.3;  4.3. 

Same  dairyman  for  May,  1916,  in  same  order:  3.5;  3.6;  3.3;  3.5;  3.4; 
4.0;  3.1;  3.2;  3.2;  3.4;  3.4;  3.8;  3.3;  3.5;  3.4;  3.4;  3.3;  3.9;  3.4;  3.4; 
3.4;  3.4;  4.2;  4.2;  4.2;  4.2;  3.3;  3.5;  3.5;  3.6;  3.4;  3.4;  3.4;  3.8. 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  AT  FORT  PLAIN,  1ST.  Y., 
BUTTER  FAT  TEST 


Butter  Fat  Test 


First 

Dairyman 

test 

F.  W.  Border,         April  

3.2 

May  

3.2 

June  

3.2 

July 

3.2 

August.  .  . 

3.3 

September 

3.2 

First 

Second 

Third 

Dairyman 

test 

test 

test 

H.  B.  Berry,  September  
October  

3.5 
3.6 

3.5 
3.7 

3.5 
3.7 

November.  .  .  . 

3.7 

3.8 

4.5 

December  .... 

4.2 

4.1 

3.7 

1916.     January  

3.6 

3.6 

3.5 

February  

3.4 

3.4 

3.5 

March  

3.4 

3.3 

3.3 

April  

3.3 

3.3 

3.3 

May  

3.1 

3.1 

3.4 

June  

3.4 

3.3 

3.4 

July  

3.3 

3.4 

3.4 

August  

3.4 

3.4 

3.6 

September.  .  .  . 

3.5 

3.8 

3.9 

First 
test 
3.2 
3.2 
3.2 
3.2 
3.3 
3.2 

Second 
test 
3.3 
3.1 
3.2 
3.2 
3.2 
3.2 

Third 
test 
3.3 
3.2 
3.2 
3.2 
3.4 
3.2 

Fourth 
test 
3.1 
3.5 
3.2 
3.2 
3.3 
3.4 

Fourth 
test 
3.8 
3.7 
4.3 
3.7 
3.3 
3.4 
3.3 
3.2 
3.5 
3.3 
3.3 
3.5 
3.9 


Aver- 
age 
3.6 
3.7 
4.1 
3.9 
3.5 
3.4 
3.3 
3.3 
3.3 
3.4 
3.4 
3.5 
3.8 


Price 

$1  49 


81 
03 
97 
75 
67 
59 
40 
15 
12 
28 
47 
65 


287 

MUTUAL  MCDERMOTT  DAIRY  COMPANY  TESTS  AT  LOWVIKLE, 
LEWIS  COUNTY,,  N".  Y. 

GEORGE  LOSON,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  am  employed  by  the  Mutual  McDermott  Dairy  Com- 
pany in  the  plant  at  Lowville.  Just  at  the  present  time  (October, 
1916)  our  plant  is  shut  down  as  we  are  not  getting  any  milk.  In 
September  we  were  shipping  about  50  cans  and  in  June,  65  to  75, 
Our  contract  is  as  follows :  We  agree  to  take  the  milk  at  the  fol- 
lowing prices :  April,  $1.30  per  cwt. ;  May,  $1.05  per  cwt, ;  June, 
99  cents  per  cwt. ;  July,  $1.25  per  cwt, ;  August,  $1.41  per  cwt. ; 
September,  $1.50  per  cwt. 

The  above  prices  are  for  milk  testing  3.3.  In  addition  there 
will  be  paid  three  cents  a  pound  for  butter  fat  up  to  5.  For  milk 
from  dairies  scoring  under  68,  there  will  be  deducted  10  cents 
for  100  pounds  from  the  above  scale.  None  of  the  dairymen 
signed  this,  but  that  was  our  understanding.  Then  I  tested  the 
milk  for  butter  fat.  Some  of  the  time  I  tested  and  some  of  the 
time  the  district  superintendent  did.  The  district  superintend- 
ent's name  is  C.  H.  Mack,  of  Unadilla,  We  test  every  fifteen  days, 
the  16th  and  the  last  of  the  month,  from  a  composite  sample  we 
made  up  every  morning  when  the  milk  was  dumped  after  it  was 
mixed.  I  simply  reach  into  that  can  and  get  a  cup  full  or  measure 
full,  a  little  thimble  cup  with  a  handle  on  it,  probably  as  large 
round  on  the  inside  as  your  thumb  and  an  inch  deep,  just  a  dipper. 
We  dip  down  in  there  to  get  a  sample  full.  I  take  the  sample  on 
the  weighing  can.  The  sample  bottles  were  on  the  rack  and  I  put 
the  sample  in.  We  take  the  samples  out  of  the  weigh  can  and  then 
empty  the  weigh  can  and  put  in  another  man's  milk  and  with  the 
same  dipper  take  another  sample.  That  was  the  way  we  did  all 
through  the  fourteen  dairies.  I  have  the  test  book  here  from  May 
until  September. 


288 

Fat  Tests 
Dairy 
number 
1  

Monthly 
average 
...                38 

2  

38 

3  

4...  

3  8 

5  

3.7 

6  

3.8 

7  

3.6 

8  

3  6 

9  .      . 

3  8 

.  Ward. —  What  does  this  4  mean  after  this  number  ? 
Mr.  Loson. —  That  is  4  per  cent. 
Mr.  Ward. —  Does  ,that  mean  that  was  allowed  at  4  ? 
Mr.  Loson. —  Yes,  sir. 

MT.  Ward. —  He  was  allowed  4  on  his  milk  on  a  basis  of  4= 
per  cent  hutter  fat? 

Mr.  Loson. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.—  Who  was  that  ? 

Mr.  Loson. —  Mr.  Ebersoll. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  large  a  dairy  did  he  have  ? 

Mr.  Loson. —  Well,  I  could  not  actually  tell  you  how  many  cows, 
sornewheres  about  sixty. 

ME.  Ward. —  Did  you  have  any  arrangement  that  his  milk  would 
be  tested  at  4  ? 

Mr.  Loson. —  It  would  be  tested  regularly',  but  it  was  put  down 
at  a  4  price.  That  arrangement  was  made  last  Spring  for  six 
months.  The  question  ^vas  where  he  would  bring  the  milk  of  all 
his  cows,  and  in  order  to  induce  him  to  bring  to  our  company  the 
company  agreed  to  pay  him  on  a  4  per  cent  basis,  I  so  understood. 
He  had  stayed  out  for  three  months.  In  his  case  we  did  not  de- 
pend upon  the  test  of  the  milk,  but  put  it  down  at  4,  as  agreed. 
The  real  test  of  his  milk  was  left  off.  I  have  not  got  a  record  of 
it  anywhere.  I  was  told  he  was  to  be  allowed  4  per  cent,  that  is 
all  I  know  about  it,  regardless  of  what  his  milk  really  showed. 
But  he  went  on  a  strike  too.  Mr.  Mack  Instructed  me  to  do  that, 


289 

the  division  superintendent.  Ebersoll  was  the  only  patron  that 
that  applied  to." 

It  will  appear  from  the  foregoing  testimony,  that  buying  milk 
on  the  butter  fat  basis  readily  lends  itself  to  unfair  discrimination 
between  dairymen,  and  easily  becomes  an  instrument  of  possiblfe 
fraud  in  the  station  ill-equipped  to  make  accurate  and  reliable 
tests,  if  operated  by  an  unscrupulous  manager.  The  operation  ocf 
all  the  stations  should  be  supervised  by  a  Department  of  the  State 
carefully  and  continuously. 

There  is  hardly  any  weighing  apparatus  in  the  State  so  import- 
ant to  the  dairymen  as  the  scales  in  milk  stations,  yet  it  would 
appear  that  the  Sealer  of  Weights  and  Measures  in  very  few 
counties  pays  any  attention  whatsoever,  so  far  as  is  disclosed  to 
this  Committee  by  the  operators  of  the  stations,  to  the  station 
weighing  apparatus.  Only  in  a  very  small  number  of  counties  has 
it  appeared  that  the  Sealer  of  Weights  and  Measures  has  at  any 
time  visited  a  milk  station.  Where  a  collecting  station  asserts  its 
intention  to  buy  milk  on  butter  fat  test,  such  contract  should  be 
rigidly  adhered  to.  Fraud  and  misrepresentation  in  the  use  of 
these  tests  or  in  making  of  samples  should  be  punished.  Accurate 
records  of  the  tests  should  be  kept  at  the  station  at  all  times  and 
false  entries  as  to  the  tests  should  be  made  a  penal  offense.  Where 
the  test  is  really  carried  on  with  proper  equipment,  accurate  records 
kept  and  honest  methods  followed,  it  probably  affords  an  advan- 
tageous measure  of  value. 

THREE  CENTS  PER  POINT 

It  is  the  custom  where  butter  fat  tests  are  used  to  add  or  deduct 
three  cents  per  point  of  butter  fat  from  the  base  price.  The  three 
cents  per  point  is  based  upon  the  proposition  that  butter  fat  is 
worth  thirty  cents  per  pound,  as  an  average  price  throughout  the 
year.  The  evidence  would  tend  to  show  that  this  was  not  a  just 
measure  of  the  value  of  the  butter  fat  in  the  year  1916.  Until 
such  <a  time  as  it  may  be  found  desirable  to  permit  the  standard- 
izing of  milk  sold,  as  is  already  done  in  certain  countries  of 
Europe,  the  problem  of  adjusting  the  desirable  qualities  of  market 
milk  on  a  butter  fat  basis  is  a  difficult  one. 
10 


290 

It  is  an  undoubted  fact  that  the  dairymen  in,  some  sections  of 
the  State  having  herds  producing  large  butter  fat  content  in  the 
milk,  desire  and  it  will  be  necessary  for  them  to  be  paid  on  a  butter 
fat  basis.  It  is  undoubtedly  true  that  such  high  butter  fat  milk 
has  a  certain  market  demand  peculiar  to  it.  Nevertheless,  it  sells 
and  must  sell  under  the  present  arrangement  in  competition  with 
market  milk  which  does  not  contain  so  large  a  butter  fat  content. 
The  conclusion  seems  to  be  unavoidable  that  if  market  milk  is  to 
be  purchased  and  paid  for  on  the  butter  fat  basis,  it  should  likewise 
be  standardized  and  sold  to  the  consumer  on  a  butter  fat  basis. 
In  this  way  only  is  the  consumer  charged  for  butter  fat  for  what 
lie  actually  receives.  By  this  method,  the  consumer  who  desires 
a  3  per  cent  milk  pays  for  a  3  per  cent  milk;  a  consumer  who 
desires  and  buys  a  3.5  milk  pays  for  the  same,  and  so  on  to  4.5 
per  cent,  or  to  plain  skim  milk.  We  understand  that  this  method 
is  pursued  in  foreign  countries  to  a  considerable  extent.  This  per- 
mits a  logical  organization  of  the  business  both  of  buying  and  sell- 
ing the  product  and  an  end  which  must  ultimately  be  reached  in 
order  to  put  the  varying  costs  where  they  really  belong.  Under 
the  present  method,  the  consumer  who  secures  a,  milk  testing  3'.  3 
of  butter  fat  is  actually  paying  a  part  of  the  price  of  his  more 
fortunate  neighbor  who  is  securing  from  his  dealer,  or  perhaps 
the  same  dealer,  milk  testing  4  per  cent  butter  fat.  This  is  illogical 
and  wrong.  We  believe  if  our  laws  permitted,  the  well-organized 
concerns  engaged  in  distribution,  would  soon  find  a  satisfactory 
solution  of  this  problem.  The  legislation  providing  for  a  compre- 
hensive food  and  market  department  should  give  sufficient  power 
to  such  department  to  bring  about  proper  business  methods  in 
dealing  with  this  product.  Inflexible  and  in-elastic  regulatory 
statutes  cannot  afford  relief  in  these  matters. 

How  MILK  PRICES  WERE  MADE 

A  great  deal  of  time  has  been  spent  in  discussing  the  question 
as  to  how  milk  prices  were  made,  what  factors1  were  considered  by 
the  buyers  in  determining  the  price  they  were  to  pay  for  milk  at 
at  the  country  stations  at  the  various  periods  of  the  year  when  prices 
were  put  out  from  1910  to  1915.  The  Committee  has  devoted 
some  time  into  an  examination  of  this  question.  At  the  outset  it 


291 

seemed  a  difficult  and  intricate  one,  but  on  a  full  examination 
of  the  facts  involved,  it  appears  that  during  this  period  of  years 
and  up  until  the  month  of  October,  1916,  the  price  to  be  paid  to  the 
producer  was  largely  determined  and  controlled  by  the  price  which 
the  consumer  was  in  the  habit  of  paying  without  objection  in  the 
large  cities.  In  other  words,  the  consumer  had  become  accustomed 
to  pay  a  certain  price  for  a  bottle  or  quart  of  milk  in  the  same  way 
that  he  had  become  accustomed  to  the  payment  of  street  carfares 
or  other  items  of  customary  daily  expense.  Society  in  those  com- 
munities was  and  is  instinctively  organized  to  oppose  any  increase 
in  these  customary  prices.  An  attempt  to  increase  the  customary 
price  was  followed  by  organized  resistance,  disturbance,  opposition 
and  contest.  The  public  authorities  resisted  the  attempt.  Vigor- 
ous attacks,  both  through  the  public  press  and  in  the  governing 
bodies,  were  customarily  made  against  distributors  or  others  who 
attempted  in  any  way  to  charge  a  nigher  price  for  the  product. 
It  is  claimed  that  a  'certain  company  in  the  city  of  Buffalo  became 
insolvent  through  such  attacks.  Unpleasant  situations  resulted 
which  in  the  end  led  the  buyers  of  market  milk  to  move  along  the 
line  of  least  resistance.  The  dairyman  during  the  period  of  years 
referred  to  was  disorganized,  without  the  support  of  the  great 
public  press  or  any  governing  body  such  as  came  to  the  rescue  of 
the  consumer.  He  was  accustomed  to  a  small  wage  return,  accus- 
tomed to  lack  of  organization,  accustomed  to  accept  the  station 
price  as  put  out  and  proceed  to  produce  in  the  ordinary  and  usual 
way.  He  made  during  those  years  no  resistance  to  the  situation 
imposed  upon  him  by  the  social  organization  of  the  city  consumer 
which  the  distributor  had  come  to  fear  to  face.  The  result  was 
that  in  determining  what  price  should  be  paid  to  the  dairyman,  nc 
heed  at  all  was  paid  to  the  actual  factors  of  the  cost  of  production. 
Consumption  was  increaising,  the  fields  of  market  milk  were 
extended,  and  practically  fully  developed,  but  it  was  assumed  tfj 
be,  and  actually  was,  much  easier  for  the  distributor  to  take  his 
increased  cost,  if  any,  out  of  the  dairyman  than  to  charge  them 
where  they  legitimately  should  be  charged,  to  the  consumer.  So 
that  out  of  the  prices  paid  to  the  dairyman  during  the  latter  period, 
there  was  deducted  not  only  the  increased  costs  of  the  producer, 
but  also  the  increased  costs  of  the  distributor. 


292 

In  other  words,  it  was  assumed  that  the  consumer  was  entitled 
to  receive  and  should  receive  from  the  distributing  companies  dur- 
ing 1914  and  1915  milk  at  the  customary  price. 

With  this  customary  price  fixed  and  determined  beforehand, 
the  distributor  could  easily  determine  the  quantity  of  milk  required 
for  his  trade  and  the  money  to  be*  returned  to  him  for  it.  From 
this  sum  he  proceeded  to  deduct  all  his  cost  and  expense,  together 
with  the  trading  profit  to  be  derived  from  the  business.  What 
remained  in  his  hands  from  the  receipts  was  the  price  permitted 
to  be  paid  to  the  dairyman  for  the  raw  milk,  and  this  resulted  in 
the  contract  schedules  or  proclamations  at  the  station  doors.  This 
situation  is  practically  conceded  by  the  larger  distributors  who 
testified  before  the  Committee. 


HALLOCK,  testified: 

I  am  the  vice-president  of  the  Borden  Condensed  Milk  Company, 
and  the  head  of  the  Farms  Products  Division..  That  is  the  fluid 
milk  end  of  the  business.  We  have  business  in  New  York,  !N"ew 
Jersey,  Connecticut,  Pennsylvania,  Illinois  and  Wisconsin,  and  in 
all  the  western  states  where  we  have  farm  products.  In.  fixing 
prices  there  is  an  economic  law  that  rules.  In  other  words,  they 
have  to  buy  on  what  they  can  sell  for.  If  you  have  a  large  supply 
you  have  to  look  for  the  market  and  your  selling  price  is  deter- 
mined by  that,  what  you  can  sell  it  for.  The  capacity  of  the  market 
to  take  it  is  about  fixed.  The  wholesale  business  is  a  small  part 
of  our  business.  We  are  not  looking  for  that,  but  we  have  not  suc- 
ceeded in  establishing  generally  the  habit  in  the  hotels  or 
restaurants  or  confectioners  of  making  a  contract  for  six  month's 
supply  at  a  time  at  a  fixed  price.  In  putting  out  our  prices  in  the 
Spring  of  1915,  we  based  it  on  the  selling  price.  Take  the  like 
period  of  the  previous  year,  the  same  six  months,  you  would  know 
what  you  paid,  what  your  milk  cost  you  during  those  six  months 
in  case  and  what  it  averaged  you  in  the  selling  price  and  you  would 
determine  what  you  could  pay  for  it  on  that  basis. 

Mr.  Ward.  —  In  1915,  you  did  not  consider  at  all  the  proposition 
that  the  consumer  might  be  charged  something  more  than  he  was 
tbe  year  prior,  in  1914  ? 


293 

Mr.  Hallock. —  Not  in  the  purchasing,  no,  sir.  What  we  would 
pay  was  based  on  the  previous  selling  price  on  the  assumption  that 
the  consumer  would  get  during  the  next  six  months  milk  at  the 
same  price  that  he  had  prior  to  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Prices  were  going  up  to  everybody  including  the 
dairyman  and  it  was  costing  him  more  to  make  milk.  Wasn't 
that  obvious  in  April  or  March,  1915  ? 

Mr.  Hallock. —  It  might  have  been  from  the  farmer's  viewpoint. 
It  is  easy  enough  to  put  it  up,  but  it  is  not  so  easy  to  get  the  price 
and  hold  your  business.  In  other  words,  I  would  put  milk  pretty 
much  on  the  basis  of  city  carfare,  or  something  like  that,  as  that 
seems  to  be  established  in  the  public  mind  that  they  will  pay  a 
certain  price  for  milk.  That  has  been  an  old  custom  for  years, 
whether  it  is  good  or  not.  Personally,  I  think  those  prices  to  be 
right  should  fluctuate  periodically  to  the  customer  as  well  as  to 
the  producer. 

R.  E.  VAN  CISE,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
I  am  president  and  manager  of  the  Mutual  McDermott  Milk 
Company  in  the  City  of  New  York.  I  have  been  in  the  milk 
business  fifteen  years.  I  have  managed  country  stations,  done 
labor  and  a  few  other  things.  I  was  twenty  when  I  started  in  the 
milk  business  and  have  worked  my  way  from  the  country  station 
into  the  city  supply  gradually.  Our  company  distributes  about 
125  cans  of  milk  per  day. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  take  it  that  prior  to  October,  1916,  for  one 
economic  reason  or  another,  the  actual  costs  and  need  of  the  pro- 
ducer were  not  considered  fully  in  fixing  the  price  which  he  was 
to  receive  for  his  product. 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  I  don't  think  they  were,  no. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is,  as  suggested  by  Mr.  Hallock  yesterday, 
in  fixing  the  price  it  was  assumed  that  it  was  impractical  for  one 
reason  or  another  ;to  charge  any  increased  cost  to  the  product  on 
the  consumer  in  the  city ;  they  would  become  habituated,  as  he  says, 
along  the  line  of  the  street  carfare  to  pay  a  certain  price. 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  I  think  his  conclusions  were  about  right,  along 
the  line  of  my  thought. 


294 

Mr.  Ward. — And  an  attempt  to  change  those  unit  prices  met 
with  bitter  opposition  regardless  of  the  facts  involved. 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  That  is  true. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  the  result  was  that  the  distributor  assumed 
that  the  sale  price  must  remain  fairly  constant. 

Mr.  Van  Cise.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  that  in  determining  how  much  the  producer 
should  get  that  sale  price  was  taken  as  constant,  the  cost  of  capital, 
labor  and  distribution  was  deducted  from  it,  and  what  was  left 
went  to  the  dairyman  ? 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  Something  like  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  may  be  a  rather  crude  way  of  stating  it,  but 
that  is  what  it  approximately  resulted  in,  and  the  result  was  that 
violent  measures  were  finally  resorted  to  by  the  dairymen,  such 
as  pouring  it  on  the  ground. 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  those  violations  brought  about  a  temporary 
readjustment. 

Mr.  Van  Cise. —  Yes  —  by  that,  I  mean,  of  course,  the  question 
is  not  settled  yet  by  any  manner  of  means.  The  problem  is  to 
avoid  such  forcible  methods  in  the  future  and  to  give  these  questions 
economic  consideration." 

CONDITIONS  INTOLERABLE  TO  THE  DAIRYMEN 

During  the  year  1916,  these  conditions  became  no  longer  toler- 
able to  the  dairymen  of  the  State.  The  demand  for  milk  during 
the  years  1915  and  1916  and  for  milk  production  of  all  kinds  ex- 
ceeded the  supply.  Makers  of  condensed  and  other  milk  products 
having  contracts  to  fulfill  were  seeking  in  every  corner  of  the  State 
to  increase  their  supply.  The  market  milk  men  had  contracts 
with  the  dairymen,  collecting  stations  and  facilities  to  transport 
their  milk.  The  distributors  were  securing  the  milk  for  less  than 
the  cost  of  production,  but  the  only  party  suffering  through  loss  of 
profit  was  the  dairyman.  He  received  no  appreciable  benefit  from 
the  increased  demand,  no  fair  return  for  the  increased  costs  of 


295 

production.  A  study  of  the  situation  reveals  at  once  the  law  of 
supply  and  demand  had  ceased  to  operate  and  did  not  in  fact  con- 
trol or  to  any  considerable  degree  affect  the  market  price.  Of 
course,  butter  and  cheese  increased  in  price  and  in  some  small 
degree  the  increased  prices  of  cheese  took  up  some  of  the  milk 
which  might  otherwise  have  gone  into  the  market  milk  and  con- 
densed product.  But  manufacturers  of  butter  and  cheese  in  the 
State  had  been  completely  subordinated  to  the  production  of 
market  milk  and  the  prices  already  fixed  to  be  paid  for  market 
milk  controlled  to  a  considerable  degree  butter  and  cheese  milk 
prices.  The  following  table  shows-  how  comparatively  unimportant 
the  butter  and  cheese  manufacture  had  become  in  the  State  of  New 
York.  This  table  applies  to  the  ten  years  from  1899  to  1909.  It 
is  probably  safe  to  assume  that  a  much  greater  comparative  change 
had  taken  place  during  the  years  from  1909  to  1916. 

Pounds  of  Butter  Made  on  Farms  and  in  Factories 

Change  in 
1899  1909  10  years 

New  York 115,408,222       69,358,918     Decrease  40% 

Wisconsin 106,552,649     131,085,193      Increase  23% 

Minnesota 82,363,315     123,551,515      Increase  50% 

Butter  production  in  New  York  decreased  40%  in  10  years. 

Cheese  Made  on  Farms  and  in  Factories 

1899  1909 

New  York 130,010,584:     105,584,947     Decrease  19% 

Wisconsin 79,384,298     148,906,910      Increase  88% 

Cheese  production  in  New  York  decreased  19%  in  10  years. 

During  the  same  10  years,  the  amount  of  milk  sold  in  New  York 
State  to  be  consumed  as  milk  increased.  Making  allowance  for 
the  amounts  used  in  making  butter  and  cheese  the  amount  of  milk 
sold  to  be  consumed  as  milk  considerably  more  than  doubled  in  the 
10  years  1899-1909. 

DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

But  closely  following  upon  the  investigations  of  this  'Committee 
and  attending  the  publicity  given  to  the  condition  of  dairy  farmers 
throughout  the  State,  a  force  which  had  been  practically  dormant 


296 

for  several  years  assumed  new  activity  and  sprang  into  vigorous 
life. 

During  all  the  years  from  1910  to  1916,  when  these  forces  wera 
operating  in  the  State  to  the  detriment  of  the  dairyman  and  the 
dairy  industry,  the  State  had  taken  no  single  step  to  remedy  the 
condition,  but  public  interest  awoke  upon,  publicity  being  given 
to  the  actual  conditions  confronting  the  dairymen,  as  revealed  by 
the  evidence  taken  by  this  Committee.  This  publicity  brought  to 
the  dairyman  support  both  from  the  consumer  and  distributor.  It 
brought  into  the  situation  a  disposition  to  remedy  conditions 
which  all  who  were  acquainted  with  the  facts  admitted  to  be  unjust. 
The  dairymen  of  this  and  neighboring  states  had  for  nine  years 
past  been  endeavoring  to  form  an  effective  organization  by  which 
they  might  through  a  common  agency  cooperate  with  one  another 
in  selling  their  product  as  market  milk  at  a  fair  price.  Their 
attempts  to  bring  about  an  effective  organization  had  not  met  with 
success  and  the  organization  itself  in  the  early  summer  of  1916 
was  without  means  to  further  its  purposes  or  secure  an  effective 
organization  that  would  cover  the  market  milk  territory.  The 
further  history  and  accompanying  events  will  perhaps  be  better 
explained  by  the  extracts  from  the  evidence  and  records  of  the 
Committee. 

ALBERT  MANNING,  being  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  live  at  Otisville  in  Orange  county,  •N.  Y.  A  brief  history 
of  the  origin  and  purposes  of  the  Dairymen's  League  as  far  as  I 
know  it,  is  -as  follows : 

It  was  first  started  in  the  Orange  County  Pomona  Grange  by  the 
appointment  of  a  committee  to  confer  with  the  New  York  Milk 
Exchange,  which,  at  that  time  was  the  principal  organization  in 
New  York  City  which  established  the  prices  which  the  farmers 
received  for  their  milk.  It  was  brought  to  our  attention  that  they 
might  recognize  the  farmers  in  arriving  at  what  would  be  a  fair 
and  satisfactory  price.  The  committee  conferred  with  them  and 
they  reported  to  their  organization  and  replied  later  that  we  were 
not  as  a  Grange  an  organization  of  dairymen  and  had  no  authority 
to  sell  the  milk  or  s!ay  what  the  members  would  be  satisfied  with  for 
their  milk,  and  taking  that  suggestion  we  commenced  forming  an 
organization  of  dairymen  alone.  It  was  some  ten  years  ago.  We 


297 

did  not  form  a  permanent  organization  until  1907.  This  was 
prior  to  that.  We  formed  this  temporary  organization  and  com- 
menced securing  memberships  from  farmers  who  were  dairymen 
alone,  and  in  1907  we  had  secured  an  organization  representing 
about  50,000'  cows  and  then  formed  our  permanent  organization 
and  were  incorporated  under  the  laws  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey. 
The  purpose  of  the  organization  was  to  secure  as  members  thoso 
who  were  shipping  milk  to  New  York  City  markets.  We  have  in 
that  organization  dairymen  in  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Ver- 
mont, 'Connecticut,  Massachusetts,  as  well  as  New  York  Stats. 
The  treasurer  is  Louis  M.  Hardin,  Sussex,  New  Jersey.  He  >ia 
a  farmer  and  in  no  other  business.  I  am  the  general  secretary  and 
live  at  Otisville.  The  principal  office  of  the  corporation  is  at  No. 
93  Spring  street,  Newton,  New  Jersey. 

It  is  a  :stock  corporation.  The  authorized  capital  stock  is  $100,- 
000.  Dairymen  are  subscribing  for  that  all  the  time.  We  are 
selling  stock  all  the  time.  I  cannot  offhand  tell  you  how  many 
shares  of  the  stock  have  been  sold.  The  subscription  of  stock  is 
based  upon  the  number  of  cows  in  their  dairies.  They  get  one- 
tenth  of  a  share  for  every  cow  they  subscribe  for  at  25  cents  a  cow. 
That  is,  ten  cows  would  be  one  share.  Eight  cows  would  be  eight- 
tenths  shares.  This  share  would  be  of  the  par  value  of  $2.50. 
That  is  the  selling  value  of  the  stock.  I  have  a  sample  of  the  stock 
here  and  can  let  you  see  it.  That  is  the  only  capital  stock  it  has. 
At  this  time,  I  think  that  less  than  one-half  of  it  has  been  sold; 
somewhere  in  the  neighborhood  of  40,000  shares.  The  proceeds 
of  these  sales  has  been  used  to  defray  the  expenses  of  organizing 
the  local  branches  of  the  League.  Local  branches  are  established 
or  aimed  to  be  established  where  there  are  milk  receiving  stations. 
The  subscriptions  for  stock  are  not  high,  as  you  see.  It  was  de- 
signed simply  to  cover  the  cost  of  the  missionary  work  that  was 
necessary  to  explain  the  purposes  of  the  organization  to  the  farmers 
through  the  different  sections  of  these  states.  This  work  was  done 
by  different  men  whom  we  were  able  to  secure  and  hire  for  that 
purpose. 

The  officers  and  directors  of  the  organization  as  they  were 
from  time  to  time  assisted  in  that  work  and  we  had  at  different 
times  parties  outside,  whom  we  were  able  to  secure,  that  went  in  the 


298 

field  and  travelled  around  under  our  direction  as  we  found  appli- 
cations to  organize  branches.  One  was  Mr.  Kilburn,  of  Lowville, 
Lewis  County;  Mr.  Potter  in  Oneida  County,  and  several  others. 
These  men  have  been  employed  since  1910.  The  first  meeting  of 
the  corporation  was  held  at  Newton,  1ST.  J.,  on  the  23d  day  of  July, 
19101.  The  following  incorporators  were  present  or  represented: 
Warren  D.  Haggerty,  in  person,  one  hundred  shares;  Levy  H. 
Morris,  in  person,  one  hundred  shares ;  Arthur  E.  Rutherford,  by 
proxy  by  Albert  Manning,  one  hundred  shares ;  Charles  H.  Tuttle, 
by  proxy  by  Albert  Manning,  one  hundred  shares ;  Milton  A.  Lane, 
by  proxy  by  Albert  Manning,  one  hundred  shares.  At  that  meet- 
ing the  chairman  reported  that  the  certificate. of  incorporation  of 
the  company  had  been  recorded  in  the  office  of  the  clerk  of  Sussex 
County,  the  4th  day  of  October,  1907.  Before  that,  we  had  a 
temporary  organization.  These  incorporators  to  incorporate  had 
to  go  through  certain  forms  and  subscribe  for  these  number  of 
shares  to  comply  with  the  law  and  then  we  sold  that  to  individual 
members  and  had  it  transferred  later  so  that  each  of  the  incorpo- 
rators had  only  his  shares  for  the  number  of  cows  he  had  in  his 
dairy,  although  he  subscribed  and  agreed  to  take  $250'  worth.  As 
their  shares  were  sold,  they  were  transferred  to  different  members 
of  the  organization.  They  had  to  pledge  that  number  of  shares 
to  the  treasurer.  I  don't  just  recall  now.  We  keep  stock  books  and 
I  think  about  13,000  certificates  have  been  issued  from  time  to 
time  running  in  amount  from  25  cents  up.  The  largest,  I  think, 
is  one  for  three  hundred  cows.  We  have  to  make  a  yearly  report 
in  the  State  of  New  Jersey.  At  the  last  annual  report  we  had 
approximately  190,000'  cows.  That  would  be  about  $47,500.  That 
was  in  January,  1916.  That  was  all  received  in  cash  by  our 
treasurer  and  has  been  disbursed.  There  is  a  very  little  balance 
in  the  treasury.  At  the  end  of  the  last  fiscal  year,  when  a  report 
was  made  there  was  on  hand  $3,168.85.  That  was  the  balance 
on  hand  December  1,  1915.  The  treasurer  received  a  salary  of 
$100  a  year  and  the  secretary  $900  and  the  president  and  directors 
nothing.  We  pay  the  solicitors  about  $16  a  week)  and  their  ex- 
penses. I  have  a  copy  of  the  treasurer's  report,  the  original  one 
that  he  gave  me.  Both  the  treasurer  and  myself  keep  a  detailed 
record  of  the  receipts  and  disbursements.  The  treasurer  has  a  full 


299 

account.  The  funds  are  kept  by  the  treasurer  in  such  depositories 
as  the  board  of  directors  order,  some  in  the  Middle-town  National 
Bank  and  some  in  the  Sussex  County  Bank,  in  the  treasurer's  name. 
In  1913,  1914  and  1915,  we  disbursed  $28,646.50'.  In  the  first 
few  years  neither  the  secretary  nor  treasurer  received  any  salary. 
Then  later  $600'  and  now  $1,000  cover  the  salary  item. 

The  by-laws  provided  that  should  the  funds  of  the  treasurer  be 
insufficient  to  meet  their  obligations,  they  may  levy  an  assessment 
upon  the  members  not  to  exceed  25  cents  per  cow  for  the  number 
of  cows  in  their  dairy  in  any  one  year,  but  it  is  not  so  on  the  stock. 
We  do  not  assess  the  stock,  but  the  by-laws  provide  that  we  can 
assess  them  for  the  number  of  cows  they  have  in  the  dairy,  whether 
one  cow  or  ten  cows.  A  short  time  ago  as  we  needed  money  to  re- 
new this  work,  we  levied  an  assessment  of  25  cents  per  cow.  If  it 
was  all  collected  that  would  bring  about  $45,000  additional.  It 
was  deemed  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  the  association  this  year 
to  provide  itself  with  these  funds  in  order  to  meet  whatever  obliga- 
tions we  might  have,  present  or  future,  that  may  be  thought  neces- 
sary by  the  board  of  directors.  There  was  a  deficit  in  the  receipts 
for  a  period  of  years.  The  disbursements  were  greater  than  the 
receipts.  But  there  was  no  deficit  that  required  this  assessment. 
It  was  done  to  extend  the  organization  and  do  such  necessary  work 
as  the  board  of  directors  felt  advisable  at  this  time  to  promote  the 
the  dairy  interests  of  the  State.  Our  report  shows  as  follows: 
December  1,  1912,  balance  on  hand  $4,517.38;  receipts  during 
1913,  1914  and  1915,  were  $27,2-98.05;  but  of  those  receipts  in 
1915  there  was  only  $69.90.  We  have  got  the  receipts  from  the 
very  beginning  so  we  can  tell  where  every  dollar  came  from  and 
every  dollar  went  to.  All  checks  had  to  be  signed  by  both  the 
president  and  the  treasurer.  The  treasurer  is  under  bond  and 
the  checks  have  to  be  signed  by  two  officers.  The  organizer  goes 
into  a  district  and  selects  a  town  where  there  is  a  receiving  station, 
where  milk  is  being  delivered,  and  interviews  the  milk  producers 
in  that  section  and  secures  their  signatures  to  the  agreement  agree- 
ing to  pay  25  cents  a  cow  for  the  number  of  cows  in  their  dairy,  for 
which  they  will  receive  stock.  This  list,  together  with  the  sub- 
scription, is  forwarded  to  the  secretary  and  stock  is  issued,  the 
record  made  and  the  money  forwarded  to  the  treasurer. 


300 

The  League  has  no  other  source  of  income  besides  these  stock 
subscriptions  (September,  1916).  There  is  no  dividend  guar- 
antee on  the  stock  and  we  do  not  aim  to  lead  our  stockholders  to 
believe  that  there  will  be  any  dividends.  The  object  of  subscribing 
is  simply  to  furnish  funds  for  them  to  organize,  pay  the  expenses 
of  continuing  the  organization  with  the  idea  of  getting  a  better 
price  for  the  milk,  promoting  beneficial  legislation  or  defeating 
hostile  legislation  — -  any  thing  they  think  will  advance  the  dairy 
interests  of  the  State.  This  is  the  first  assessment  we  have  ever 
attempted  to  levy.  The  subscriptions  of  stock  met  our  necessary 
expenditures  up  until  this  time.  Fred  Mason,  Frank  Mosell,  S.  M. 
Potter,  William  M.  Cox,  G-.  M.  Babcock,  Clifford  E.  Huff,  were  all 
engaged  in  the  work  of  organizing  or  collecting  for  the  stock.  The 
directors  are  paid  their  expenses  and  no  per  diem.  Directors 
meetings  are  held  at  the  call  of  the  President.  Some  branches  cost 
much  more  to  organize  than  others.  This  book  which  I  have  here 
shows  all  the  expenditures.  You  will  find  them  all  itemized.  In 
1913,  we  disbursed  $14,474.0'9  for  these  organizers'  expenses  and 
the  travelling  expenses  of  directors  to  the  men  who  are  mentioned 
there.  Each  of  these  men  was  employed  in  organizing  branches 
of  the  league.  We  have  had  small  expenditures  which  show  there 
for  advertising  annual  meetings  and  such  things.  This  book  is 
open  to  the  examination  of  all  directors.  We  keep  the  name  of 
every  man  of  whom  we  receive  a  cent  from.  There  are  twenty-four 
directors.  Generally,  nearly  every  one  of  "them  are  present.  The 
meetings  are  held  at  such  places  as  the  president  designates.  The 
most  convenient  place  has  been  at  Albany.  1913  was  our  big  year. 
When  the  organizers  could  not  get  enough  stockholders  to  p-ay  their 
expenses,  we  stopped  them ;  we  didn't  have  the  money  to  pay  if 
the  subscriptions  were  not  large  enough  to  keep  them  going.  Always 
since  our  organization,  we  have  attempted  to  follow  legislation 
affecting  the  dairy  interests  very  closely  and  we  have  been  able  to 
secure  what  we  consider  beneficial  legislation  from  the  Legislature 
of  New  York  State.  We  were  interested  in  the  bill  reducing  the 
total  required  solids  in  milk  from  12  to  11%%.  That  was  for- 
tunate for  the  milk  producers.  We  have  not  yet  had  that  reduced 
enough.  The  ITew  York  milk  dealers  were  pleased  to  have  it,  but 
they  didn't  help  us  any  in  getting  it  through.  Lately  there  has 


301 

been  a  great  revival  of  interest  in  our  work.  ~No  considerable  fund 
of  money  has  been  paid  or  withdrawn  by  any  officers  except  for  the 
payment  of  organizers  and  traveller's  expense. 

Mr.  Ward. —  This  book  practically  shows  the  payment  of  all 
these  collections  out  for  organization  and  traveling  expenses,  except 
for  these  salaries  mentioned  and  postage. 

Mr..  Manning. —  That  is  correct.  Except  for  usual  incidental 
expenses,  envelopes,  printing  and  advertising  that  would  neces- 
sarily follow  in  such  an  association.  They  are  all  there.  There 
has  been  no  other  disposition  made  of  the  moneys  collected  what- 
soever. As  the  book  shows,  these  payments  were  made  weekly  or 
semi-monthly." 

Revival  of  1916, 

Mr.  Manning,  (continuing). — "  During  1915,  we  had  no  active 
organization  that  year.  The  OTganizers  were  not  able  to  get  enough 
new  names  to  pay  their  expenses  and  as  soon  as  they  had  covered 
the  territory  to  that  extent,  we  stopped  the  work,  but  this  summer 
there  seems  to  be  a  demand  from  our  members  for  new  organiza- 
tions, a  call  for  men  to  organize  new  branches.  When  that  came  a 
meeting  was  held  and  the  proposition  of  finances  was  taken  up  at 
a  directors'  meeting.  Most  of  the  organizers  are  practical  farmers 
and  stockholders  in  the  association.  I  don't  know  whether  they 
are  all  of  them  or  not.  It  was  aimed  to  have  men  that  were  farmers 
to  act  as  our  organizers,  so  far  as  we  were  able  to  secure  them. 
We  aimed  to  get  the  farmers  to  do  that  work  for  us.  It  wasn't 
easy  to  get  organizers  for  the  amounts  that  we  could  pay  them.  In 
1915,  because  of  lack  of  funds,  we  had  no  regular  organizers  out, 
but  they  are  now  out  (September,  1916).  We  held  a  meeting 
when  these  demands  came  in  this  summer  and  discussed  ways  and 
means  and  we  looked  about  for  ways  of  getting  capital  enough 
to  carry  on  the  work.  There  was1  great  interest  and  a  demand  for 
active  work  and  we  thought  that  our  organizers  had  exhausted 
the  field  to  a  limited  extent,  the  canvassing  field  of  securing  new 
members,  and  that  was  the  general  impression  and  our  purpose 
was  to  go  to  the  old  dairymen.  We  were  not  anticipating  so  many 
new  ones  coming  in,  such  an  interest  and  a  demand  for  active  work. 
Then  we  thought  that  in  order  to  secure  the  necessary  funds,  it 


302 

would  require  an  assessment  on  the  old  members  and  that  asse&s- 
ment  of  25  cents  per  cow  was  levied.  Then  when  they  began  to 
meet  for  the  purpose  of  collecting  those  assessments,  we  found  that 
there  were  many  other  dairymen  interested  and  wanted  to  join. 
I  don't  think  that  this  Committee  has  done  us  any  harm.  We 
found  that  in  addition  to  this  assessment  there  were  many  new 
members  ready  and  eager  to  join  and  help.  Of  course,  the  dairy- 
men, have  learned  a  great  many  things  in  the  past  few  years.  Our 
agricultural  colleges  and  experiment  stations  and  farm  bureaus 
Lave  been  teaching  the  farmer  what  it  costs  to  produce  milk  and  to 
separate  the  cost  of  milk  from  the  other  farm  operations.  In  years 
past,  they  did  not  know  that.  Practically  few  of  them  knew  what 
it  cost  to  produce  milk,  but  this  knowledge  and  the  publicity  you 
have  given  them  in  this  work  has  opened  their  eyes  and  is,  to  my 
mind,  largely  responsible  for  this  renewed  interest  in  the  dairy 
field  and  of  their  desire  and  conviction  that  they  should  receive 
more  for  their  milk,  must  receive  more  or  they  will  have  to  go  out 
of  business. 

We  notified  every  stockholder  by  a  personal  letter  that  we  had 
made  this  assessment.  They  paid  readily  and  new  money  began 
to  pour  in.  The  executive  committee,  Mr.  Cooper,  Mr.  Thompson 
and  Mr.  Sherman  were  instructed  by  the  board  of  directors  to  use 
their  judgment  in  extending  the  organization.  There  are  more 
calls  now  for  organizing  work  than,  we  can  get  men  to  go  into  the 
field  and  do.  We  have  many  volunteers  today,  hundreds  of  them 
serving  without  pay  at  all,  but  even,  then  we  cannot  get  enough  men 
to  do  the  work.  We  need  25  next  week  and  we  haven't  got  the  men 
to  place.  Up  to  July,  our  collections  were  very  small.  Since  then, 
we  have  been  active  and  these  new  members  have  come  in  and 
assessments  have  come  in  and  the  collections  are  very  large  and 
prosperous.  From  the  1st  of  August  on,  real  interest  seemed  to  be 
awakened.  Jacob  S.  Brill  is  the  president  of  the  League  at  the 
present  time.  Our  assessment  of  25  cento  a  cow  is  designed  to  just 
about  pay  the  cost  of  getting  the  members.  It  is  possible  that  we 
could  have  done  better  work  if  we  had  had  a  larger  fee. 

We  do  not  desire  or  advocate  a  strike  or  the  destroying  of  any 
product.  We  might  better  manufacture  our  milk  and  not  destroy 
it.  We  have  collected  data  as  to  what  it  costs  to  produce  milk  and 


303 

have  made  it  public  and  you  have  helped  us.  But  we  feel  we 
should  be  paid  for  milk  a  sum  that  will  cover  the  cost  of  production 
with  a  reasonable,  fair  profit.  That  is  as  far  as  we  have  ever  gone 
and  that  is  all  we  ask  the  dealer  to  pay  us.  The  dairymen  feel  it 
is  their  goods  and  they  ought  to<  have  the  right  to  say  what  it  is 
worth.  In  the  past  we  have  been  told  what  they  would  pay.  Now 
we  have  simply  in  advance  told  them  what  we  want.  Whether  they 
will  pay  it  to  us  or  not,  I  don't  know.  So  far,  the  Dairymen's 
League  is  merely  an  effort  towards  collective  bargaining.  The  Com- 
mittee has  examined  these  books  so  that  if  any  question  comes  up 
you  can  say  that  there  is  no  suspicious  diversion'  of  any  money. 
There  is  nothing  to  conceal  along  that  line. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  assume  that  when  you  levied  this  assessment  on 
the  old  members  you  did  not  expect  this  influx  of  new  money  nor 
expect  to  realize  the  sum  of  money  that  all  of  these  cows  paid. 

Mr.  Manning. —  It  far  exceeded  our  expectations,  this  spontane- 
ous interest  that  has  been  shown  since  August,  1916. 

Conditions  of  the  Dairymen 

Mr.  Manning,  (continuing). — "  There  are  a  number  of  condi- 
tions that  have  changed  in  the  last  two  years.  The  board  of  health 
restrictions  have  increased  the  cost  of  producing  milk  to  the  dairy- 
men and  they  have  also  increased  the  cost  of  distributing  the  milk 
by  the  distributor.  These  increases  and  these  rules  are  not  of  our 
making  or  seeking.  The  expenses  we  have  been  required  to  meet 
to  put  our  equipment  and  barns  in  some  instances  to  comply  with 
these  requirements  have  been  greater  than  the  buildings  cost  when 
they  were  originally  built.  The  expenses  in  the  distributing  end 
of  it,  that  is  not  our  problem.  All  we  are  looking  out  for  is  the 
price  that  will  cover  our  cost  of  production.  We  have  met  these 
increased  expenses  in  the  past  largely  through  better  and  more 
scientific  feeding,  better  grade  of  cattle,  and  the  breeding  of  large- 
producing  cattle,  but  the  changing  in  the  basis  of  purchasing  milk 
from  quantity  and  putting  it  upon  a  butter  fat  has  checked  our  pos- 
sibilities along  that  line  and  that  has>  only  served  to  make  the  agita- 
tion more  pronounced.  The  milk  is  not  sold  to  the  consumer  UDOT? 
the  same  basis  as  the  producer  is  required  to  sell  it.  If  the  con- 


304 

sinner  were  sold  the  milk  at  a  price  charged  in  proportion  to  its 
butter  fat  content,  the  same  as  the  producer  is  required  to  sell  it, 
I  question  if  there  would  be  such  a  very  large  demand  for  high 
butter  fat  milk.  It  is  only  fair  to  the  consumer  that  if  the  milk 
is  put  upon  a  butter  fat  basis,  it  should  be  sold  to  them  upon  the 
same  basis,  not  paying  the  farmer  for  a  high  butter  fat  milk  and 
selling  it  to  the  consumer  with  no  guarantee  of  its  contents,  except 
to  comply  with  the  State  standard.  We  have  found  in  our  canvass- 
ing for  the  supply  of  milk  that  in  the  census  of  the  cows  in  certain 
localities  there  are  many  less  cows  in  1916  than  there  were  when 
we  were  making  our  former  canvass  in  1914. 

Decrease  in  Number  of  Cows 

One  branch  I  have  in  mind  that  I  know  of  personally  just 
around  one  receiving  station  there  are  400'  cows  less  in  that  neigh- 
borhood than  there  were  in  1914.  You  will  find  that  situation 
quite  common  and  it  presents  a  serious  problem  to  those  who  appre- 
ciate the  vastness  of  the  dairy  interests  of  the  State  and  its  rela- 
tion to  the  maintaining  of  the  fertility  of  the  soil  of  our  State,  and 
unless  some  relief  comes  to  the  dairymen  there  will  be  many  more 
of  them  that  will  have  to  go  out  of  the  dairy  business.  These  400 
cows  that  I  spoke  of  are  absolutely  not  on  the  farms.  The  farmers 
have  gone  out  of  the  milk  producing  business  entirely  or  have 
reduced  their  dairies  to  a  very  small  number.  It  is  absolutely 
necessary  in  order  to  assure  an  adequate  supply  of  wholesome  milk 
to  the  cities  and  to  maintain  the  fertility  of  the  soil  of  the  State 
that  the  dairymen  should  get  more  money.  Through  our  survey  of 
the  dairy  sections  and  the  census  we  get  from  our  organizers  and 
the  formation  of  the  new  branches,  it  is  shown  that  the  trend  is  to 
reduce  the  herds  or  abandon  milk  production  entirely. 

The  endeavor  of  the  producer  to  get  more  money  is  a  very  im- 
portant thing  for  the  prosperity  of  the  whole  State.  It  is  our  desire 
and  intention  through  the  Dairymen's  League  to  do  some  effective 
work  to  accomplish  that  in  itself." 

It  is  proper  for  the  Committee  to  say  in  conection  with  this 
matter  that  an  examination  of  the  books  of  account  of  the  Dairy- 
men's League  by  the  Committee  and  a  checking  up  of  the  receipts 
and  expenditures  showed  an  absolutely  correct  account  of  all  the 


305 

funds  of  the  League.  All  the  moneys  received  had  been  disbursed 
in  small  weekly  payments  to  organizers  for  modest  salary  and 
traveling  expenses.  The  history  of  the  Dairymen's  League  follow- 
ing Mr.  Manning's  testimony  before  the  Committee  is  best  shown 
by  the  following  documents : 

THE 

DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

LITTLE  FALLS,  NEW  YORK 

ALBERT  MANNING,  Secretary 

OtisviWe,  N.  Y, 

Directors  Directors 

Jacob  S.  Brill,  President,  Poughquag,      Clifford  E.  Hough,  Washington,  Ct. 

N.  Y.  B.  F.  Livingston,  Chemung,  N.  Y. 

F.  H.  Thompson,  Vice-President,  Hoi-      Alfred  E.  Sheard,  Milanville,  Pa. 

land  Patent,  N.  Y.  John  S.  Petteys,  Greenwich,  N.  Y. 

Louis  M.  Hardin,  Treasurer,  Sussex,      John  L.  Hartnett,  Truxton,  N.  Y. 

N.  J.  D.  H.  Clements,  Liberty,  N.  Y.,  R.  1. 

Ira  Sharp,  Lowville,  N.  Y.  Harry  Bull,  Campbell  Hall,  N  Y. 

Frank  Sherman,  Copake,  N.  Y.  Charles  C.  Gordon,  Lowville,  N.  Y. 

D.  H.  Sliter,  Margaretville,  N.  Y.  J.  D.  Beardslee,  New  Berlin,  N.  Y. 

Harry  W.  Culver,  Amenia,  N.  Y.  Clarence  F.  Hunt,  Manlius,  N.  Y. 

Oscar  Bailey,  Brewster,  N.  Y. 

Dr.  C.  D.  Huxtable,  Richfield  Springs.  Executive  Committee 

Grant  Farrington,  Pulaski,  N.  Y.  R.  D.  Cooper,  Chairman 

Albert  E.  Helmer,  Evans  Mills,  N.  Y.      F.    H.    Thompson, 
H.  J.  Kershaw,  Sherburne,  N.  Y.  Frank  Sherman, 

R.  D.  Cooper,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y.  President,  ex-officio 

Charles  M.  Coe,  Bouckville,  N.  Y.  Secretary 

September  9,   1916. 
To  the  Members  of  the  Dairymen's  League: 

The  Directors  of  the  Dairymen's  League,  an  organization  of  which  you  are 
a  -member,  believe  that  now  is  the  time  for  the  League  to  take  definite,  united 
action  to  secure  a  fair  price  for  the  milk  of  its  members  and  have,  therefore, 
authorized  the  Executive  Committee  to  sell  the  milk  of  all  members  of  the 
League. 

The  Executive  Committee  has  arranged  to  sell  your  milk  through  the 
agency  of  the  New  York  State  Department  of  Foods!  and  Markets,  and  has 
agreed  upon  a  minimum,  uniform  price  approved  by  the  Board  of  Directors, 
for  a  period  of  six  months,  from  October  1,  1916,  to  March  31,  1917. 

As  you  have  consigned  to  the  Dairymen's  League,  your  authorized  and 
exclusive  agent,  for  sale,  all  of  the  milk  produced  upon  the  farms  controlled 
by  you,  you  are  hereby  cautioned  not  to  make  any  other  contracts  for  the 
control  of  your  milk  after  October  1,  1916. 

The  following  is  a  schedule  of  minimum  prices  which  the  League  asks  for 
ite  milk.  Grade  B  milk  testing  3  per  cent  butter-fat: 


October  .  .           

First  Dist.     Se 
$2  15 

cond  Dist. 
$2  05 
2  15 
2  15 
2  05 
2  00 
1  95 

November 

2  25 

December  

2  25 

January  

2.15 

February  . 

2  10 

March  . 

2  05 

Three  cents  per  hundred  pounds  of  milk  added  for  each  one-tenth  point 
increase  in  butter-fat.  The  prices  asked  for  the  other  grades'  take  the  same 
relative  price. 

In  the  event  that  the  Executive  Committee,  through  the  Department  of 
Foods  and  Market®,  is  unable  to  dispose  of  your  milk  at  this  price,  you  will 
be  advised  of  the  situation  and  kept  posted  as  to  the  progress'  being  made. 
No  milk  is  to  be  delivered  until  due  notice  is  received  from  the  Executive 
Committee. 

Sign  No  Contracts 

At  the  meeting  of  the  Directors  on  June  1,  1916,  a  resolution  was  passed 
levying  an  assessment  of  twenty-five  cent®  per  cow  upon  the  stockholders,  for 
the  number  of  cows  subscribed.  The  assessment  is  made  necessary  to  provide 
the  League  with  funds  to  carry  out  its  work. 

From  now  until  the  first  of  October,  your  Directors  urge  upon  you  the 
necessity  of  holding  meetings  and  doing  everything  you  can  to  increase  the 
membership  and  strengthen  the  organization  in  your  neighborhood.  By  so 
doing  you  will  strengthen  the  position  of  your  officer®  and  help  them  to  better 
serve  you. 

Make  all  'remittances  to  Albert  Manning,  Otisville,  New  York. 

Very  truly  yours, 

R.  D.  COOPER, 
Chairman  Executive  Committee. 

PURPOSES  OF  THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

The  purposes  of  this  company  shall  be  to  oppose  and  prevent  monopoly  in 
the  production  or  sale  of  milk,  and  to  encourage  competition  therein,  and  to 
protect  its  stockholders  and  the  consumers  of  milk  against  monopoly  or  any 
unlawful  combination  of  any  kind  or  nature  whereby  the  producers  or  con- 
sumers of  milk  are  injuriously  affected,  to  promote  legislation  and  board  of 
health  ordinance  beneficially  affecting  the  interests  of  the  stockholders  who 
are  producers  of  milk  for  the  Metropolitan  district,  and  other  markets,  to 
act  as  their  agents  in  marketing  their  producfe  and  to  carry  on  all  such  busi- 
ness as  its  articles  of  incorporation  authorize. 

Should  the  directors  be  unable  at  any  time  to  negotiate,  equitable  conditions 
of  sale  of  milk  from  the  local  branches  of  the  League  at  a  .price  proportionate 
with  the  cost  of  production  of  pure,  unadulterated  milk  produced  under  con- 
ditions to  properly  safeguard  the  public  health,  each  irmember  shall  be  so 
notified  and  in  such  emergency  it  shall  be  optional  with  each  local  branch  of 
the  League  whether  its  members  manufacture  their  milk  at  home  or  at  a 
place  provided  and  operated  by  the  local  branch. 

Should  the  conditions  of  any  local  branch  be  such  tfliat  the  milk  cannot  be 
sold  profitably  by  the  board  of  managers  they  may  authorize  the  sale  of  such 
milk,  making  due  allowance  for  such  local  condition®. 


307 

Any  person  or  firm  producing  milk  may  become  a  stockholder  of  this  com- 
pany, and  it  is  intended  that  none  but  milk  producers  shall  become  such  stock- 
holders. 

Any  milk  producer  desiring  to  become  a  stockholder  shall  pay  twenty-five 
(25)  cents  per  cow  for  which  stock  will  be  issued  to  him  at  the  ra,te  of  two 
dollars  and  fifty  cents  ($2.50)  per  share,  that  is  one  share  for  ten  cows  and 
for  each  additional  cow  one-tenth  share.  No  stockholder  of  this  company 
shall  sell  or  transfer  his  stock  to  any  person,  firm  or  corporation  without 
giving  the  Secretary  of  this  company  thirty  days  notice  in  writing  of  his 
intention  to  do  so,  and  this  company  hereby  reserves  the  right  to  purchase 
the  stock  of  any  stockholder  so  desiring  to  sell  and  dispose  of  his  stock  at 
the  par  value  thereof. 

Local  branches  of  the  Dairymen's  League  may  be  organized  at  any  point 
where  there  is  a  condensery,  creamery  or  shipping  station  and  may  meet  at 
will  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  the  directors  and  facilitating  the  business 
of  the  corporation,  and  may  levy  such  local  dues  for  local  purposes  as  the 
branch  may  decide. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of  the  local  branch  to  report  the  pro- 
ceedings of  these  meetings,  furnish  a  list  of  members,  and  such  other  infor- 
mation as  may  be  required  by  the  Secretary  of  the  League. 

All  subscriptions  for  stock  shall  be  promptly  forwarded  to  the  Secretary 
of  the  League,  together  with  full  name  and  addre&si,  number  of  cows>  subscribed 
for  and  present  buyer.  Checks  to  be  made  payable  to  the  Treasurer  of  the 
League. 

The  annual  meeting  of  the  stockholders,  after  the  first  year  1910,  shall  be 
held  on  the  second  Tuesday  in  December  in  in  each  year,  at  ten  o'clock  a.  m. 
93  Spring  St.,  Newton,  N.  J.,  when  they  shall  elect  by  a  plurality  vote,  by 
ballot,  the  board  of  directors,  twenty-two  in  number,  to  serve  for  one  year 
and  until  their  successors  are  elected  or  chosen  and  qualified,  each  stockholder 
being  entitled  to  one  vote,  in  person  or  by  proxy,  for  each  share  of  stock 
standing  registered  in  his  or  her  name  on  the  twentieth  day  preceding  the 
election,  exclusive  of  the  day  of  such  election,  and  a  fractional  vote  for 
fractional  shares  of  stock. 

The  Secretary  shall  give  notice  of  the  annual  or  any  special  meeting  of  the 
stockholders  by  publishing  a  notice  in  a  weekly  newspaper  published  in  each 
county  where  a  local  branch  of  the  Dairymen's)  League  is/  or  may  hereafter 
be  established  and  in  case  there  be  no  weekly  newspaper  published  in  such 
county,  then  to  publish  the  same  in  a  newspaper  circulating  in  siuch  county  j 
or  notice  may  be  given  in  such  other  way  as  the  Board  of  Directors  may  here- 
after direct. 

A  representative  either  in  person  or  by  proxy  of  ten  per  cent  of  the  stock 
issued  and  outstanding  shall  be  requisite  to  constitute  a  quorum. 

The  Board  of  Directors  shall  annually  choose  a  President,  Vice-Preeident, 
Secretary  and  Treasurer. 

The  Treasurer  shall  give  bonds  to  the  amount  named  by  tftie  Board. 

Should  the  funds  in  treasury  of  the  company  be  insufficient  to  meet  their 
obligation,  the  Board  of  Directors  may  charge  to  each  member  of  the  company 
a  fee  not  to  exceed  25  cents  per  cow  in  any  one  year. 

THIS  AGREEMENT,  made  this day  of. 1916,  by  and  be- 
tween THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE,  INCORPORATED,  party  of  the  first  part,  and 
party  of  the  second  part. 


308 

WITNESSETH:  That  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of  ONE  DOLLAR  ($1.00)  paid 
by  party  of  the  first  part  to  party  of  the  second  part,  the  receipt  whereof  is 
hereby  acknowledged,  and  of  the  covenants  and  agreements  herein  contained, 
the  said  parties  have  agreed  and  do  hereby  agree  as  follows1 : 

1.  That  the  party  of  the  second  part  hereby  agrees1  'to  consign  for  a  term 
of  years,  and  hereby  does  consign  to  party  of  the  first  part  for  sale  all  the  milk 
produced  upon  the  farms  controlled  by  party  of  the  second  part,  except  such 
milk  as  is  required  for  home,  farm  or  local  consumption,  for  and  during  the 
term  beginning  October  let,  1©16,  to  March  31st,  1917,  and  thereafter  for  six 
month  periods,  unless  30'  days'  notice  is  given  in  writing  by  either  party  before 
the  expiration  of  any  contract  period,  and  the  party  of  the  second  part  further 
agrees  to  deliver  the  said  milk  pure  and  unadulterated  in  condition  for  sale 
suitable  in  the  New  York  or  adjacent  markets,  to  the  shipping  station,  con- 
densery,  or  such  other  manufacturing  plants  as  is  designated  by  party  of  the 
first  part,  or  if  party  of  the  first  part  should  be  unable  to  dispose  of  the  said 
milk  during  any  portion  of  said  period,  said  party  of  the  second  part  shall  be 
so  notified  and  in  such  an  emergency  it  shall  be  optional  with  party  of  the 
second  part  whether  they  manufacture  their  milk  at  home  or  at  a  place  pro- 
vided and  operated  by  the  local  branch. 

2.  The  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  sell  and  dispose  of  the  said  milk  to 
the  best  advantage  and   to  remit  the  proceeds  thereof  to  the  party  of  the 
second  part  less  the  commission  hereinafter  mentioned. 

3.  IT  is  FURTHER  AGREED  that  the  party  of  the  first  part  shall  receive  a  com- 
mission from  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  one  cent  for  each  one  hundred  pounds 
of  milk  sold  during  the  time  of  this  contract  and  the  said  one  cent  for  each 
one  hundred  pounds  shall  be  deducted  from  the  proceeds  of  sale. 

4.  IT  is  MUTUALLY  COVENANTED  AND  AGREED  that  in  case  either  party  fails 
to  perform  the  covenants  herein  agreed  to  be  performed  by  such  party,  the 
party  so  failing  shall  and  will  pay  to  the  other  the  sum  of  Five  Dollars 
($5.00)  per  cow  for cows  for  which  party  of  the  second  part  has  taken 

stock,  which  soim  is  hereby  fixed  and  agreed  upon  as  the  liquidated  damage  for 
such  failure,  and  that  the  same  shall  in  no  event  be  'considered  a  penalty. 

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF  the  parties  to  these  presents  have  hereunto  set  their 
hands  and  seals,  the  day  and  year  first  above  written. 

THE      DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE,  INCORPORATED. 

Signed,  sealed  and  delivered  in  the 
presence  of 

• [L.S.] 

(Signature  of  President  of  State  League.) 


Witness  of  President. 
Witness  for  stockholder. 


[L    8.] 

(Signature  of  stockholder.) 
Address 

Name  of  branch 

Present  purchaser  of  milk 


Address 


309 


NAME 

Post 
office 

Number 
cows 

Amount 
paid 

No.  shares 
subscribed 
for 

Present 
buyer 

A  history  of  the  contest  during  September  and  October,  1916,  is 
illustrated  in  the  following  bulletins  issued  from  time  to  time  by 
the  Dairymen's  League  and  in  evidence  before  the  Committee, 
which  are  printed  in  part : 

Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIBYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

Wednesday  Sept.  20,  1916  No.  1 

The  following  notice  to  Dairymen  appeared  upon  the  Bulletin  Board  at  the 
Borden  Plants :    "  For  present  and  until  further  notice  we  will  publish  monthly 
prices,  which  we  can  offer  for  milk  for  the  following  month.     October. 
1st  District  $1.90  for  100  pounds,  2nd  Dist.  $1.80  for  100  Ibs." 
What  does  this  new  dodge  mean?     Borden's  are  trying  to  break  our  ranks. 
Onoe  you  accept  their  prices,  they  have  you  for  six  months^     Don't  fall  for  it. 
We  insist  that  everyone  stand  firm  and  absolutely  refuse  to  sign  any  con- 
tracts.   If  the  Borden's  or  any  other  Company  want  your  milk,  New  York  State 
Department  of  Foods  and  Markets  will  sell  it  to  them  at  the  League  Price. 

The  Sheffield  Farms  schedule  is  a  conundrum.    Take  no  chances.    Sign  none 
of  their  contracts. 

Why  have  not  all  the  large  companies  put  out  their  prices  at  the  same  time 
as  usual.  There  is  consternation  in  the  ranks  of  the  dealers. 

Many  co-operative  plants  have  sold  their  milk  at  the  following  prices : 

October     $2.23  December  $2.33  February  $2,18 

November  2.33  January      2.23  March         2.13 


310 

Many  small  dealers  are  accepting  the  League  Price.  The  Borden  Condensed 
Milk  Company  aay  they  will  not  deal  with  any  organized  body  of  farmers, 
or  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets,  but  will  deal  with  the  farmer 
individually.  Why?  Think  it  over. 

Mr.  Reader,  if  you  are  not  a  member  of  the  Dairymen's  League  —  Join  at 
once. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 

R.  D.  COOPER,  Chairman, 
F.  H.  THOMPSON, 
FRANK  SHERMAN. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Tour  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Thursday  Sept.  21,  1916  No.  2 

Large  dealer®  are  contracting  for  milk  at  $2.40  per  hundred  in  territory  out- 
side to  ship  into  New  York  City.  They  can  pay  our  prices.  Stand  firm  and 
make  them  come  across. 

Some  large  dealers  tell  the  individual  farmer  they  will  pay  the  League  price. 
Stand  and  make  them  buy  from  the  Dairymen's  League.  Make  them  oome 
dean.  Don't  be  frightened  at  their  threats,  nor  deceived  by  their  vague 
promises.  Don't  sign.  Don't  deliver  your  milk  October  firsifc  or  after  without 
notice  from  the  League. 

You  (have  the  milk.  They  can't  do  business  without  it.  Their  plants  and 
cans  are  no  good  without  your  milk. 

EVERY  MAN  SHOULD  STAND  FOR  THE  PRICE 
The  Borden  and  Sheffield  Farms  contracts  are  cats  in  a  bag,  Don't  buy  them. 

LEAGUE  PRICE 

First  Second 

Zone  Zone 

October $2 . 15  $2 .06  For  3  per  cent  milk 

November 2 . 25  2 . 15  For  3  per  cent  milk 

December 2 .25  2. 16  For  3  per  cent  milk 

January 2. 15  2.05  For  3  per  cent  milk 

February 2 . 10  2. 00  For  3  per  cent  milk 

March 2 .05  1 .95  For  3  per  cent  milk 

The  price  is  rigiht.    Take  nothing  less. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


311 

Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Friday  Sept.  22  1916  No.  3 

You  can't  catch  seven  o'clock  after  the  whistle  blows.  The  whistle  will  blow 
October  Is*.  Be  Prepared. 

We  are  going  to  fight  it  out  on  our  prices  if  it  takes  all  winter. 

A  stitch  in  time  saves  nine.    Look  for  the  weak  places  in  your  Branch. 

Orange  County  reports  but  a  few  scattering  farmers  outside  the  League. 

Some  dealers  in  Orange  County  have  told  those  outside  the  League  that  they 
will  not  take  their  milk  unless  they  join  the  League. 

Orange  County  has  doubled  the  number  of  League  cows  since  this  campaign 
started. 

Fifteen  Borden  plants  in  Orange  County.  All  patrons  standing  solid  as  a 
rock. 

Ulster  County  is  well  organized. 

Unless  the  dealers  meet  our  prices  October  1st,  the  actual  fighting  is  on. 
Get  your  machine  guns  on  the  firing  line  for  business  October  first. 

Orange  County  is  planning  a  League  parade. 

St.  Lawrence  County  is  standing  by  the  League. 

The  milk  dealers  are  trying  to  tie  up  all  the  cans.    You  tie  up  all  the  milk. 

Levy  Dairy  Company  is  trying  to  buy  milk  from  the  cooperative  plants. 

180  distributors  in  New  York  City  are  in  position  to  deliver  milk  at  one 
cent  a  quart  less  than  is  charged  by  the  big  dealers  and  are  prepared  to  pay 
the  farmers  one  cent  increase  for  which  the  League  is  fighting. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Rend  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Saturday  Sept.  23,  1916  No.  4 

One  of  the  Borden  "  Doctors  "  who  has  been  at  Earlville,  Chenango  County, 
has  stated  that  he  thought  the  Bordens  would  be  forced  to  give  in. 

Secretaries  of  the  Branches  will  receive  a  list  of  cheese  factories  and 
creameries  in  New  York  State,  available  for  use  if  producers  are  required  to 
hold  back  their  milk  October  1st.  Be  Prepared. 

Hallock,  Vice-President  of  Bordens,  says  they  are  receiving  more  than  the 
normal  number  of  promises.  Promises  won't  fill  their  milk  cans. 

The  number  of  cans  available  upon  quick  notice  is  now  being  ascertained. 

Orange  County  has  ordered  1,000  cans  for  its  members. 

The  requests  for  new  Branches  to  be  formed  far  exceeds  the  supply  of 
organizers. 

Get  every  milk  producer  into  the  League. 


312 

AW  things  come  to  them  who  wait.     Most  surely  when  we  know  we  are  in 
the  right. 
Sign  no  contracts. 
Don't  deliver  your  milk  after  October  1st. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIBYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Monday  Sept.  25,  1916  No.  5 

Dogged  determination  is  the  principal  factor  in  winning  a  fight. 

Preparedness  is  the  word. 

See  if  you  can  rent  or  buy  a  cream  separator.  Look  up  a  supply  of  butter 
tubs,  crocks  and  churns. 

This  is  most  important.    Every  local  Branch  get  busy. 

Have  your  members  get  Bulletin  No.  60,  "  Farm  Butter  Making."  Address 
College  of  Agriculture,  Ithaca,  New  York.  Induce  them  to  keep  all  calves 
and  pigs  to  feed  up  the  skim  milk. 

Make  your  winter  supply  of  butter. 

Do  not  force  your  cows  by  high  feeding 

Each  Branch  appoint  a  committee  of  the  most  influential  men  to  be  at  each 
shipping  plant  to  prevail  upon  those  w>ho  are  not  withholding  their  milk,  to 
stand  firm  for  the  price. 

Stick  and  you  can't  lose. 

Report  to  Executive  Committee,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Tour  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Tuesday  Sept.  26,  1916  No.  8 

Wicks  Investigation  Committee  has  examined  books  of  the  Dairymen's 
League.  Books  were  shown  in  full  and  at  length. 

Chairman  Wick®. —  "I  think  this  clears  the  atmosphere." 

Judge  Ward. — "  We  find  no  suspicious  diversion  of  money  collected." 

Cattaraugus  County  .has  been  added  to  the  list  of  League  counties. 

Indications  are  that  1€0,000  cows  will  be  added  to  the  League's  strength. 

Get  a  line  on  cheese  factories  and  creameries1  to  take  care  of  your  milk 
October  1st. 

Do  it  now. 

D.  H.  Burrell  &  Co.,  Little  Falls  N.  Y.;  Creamery  Package  Company,  47  West 
34th  street,  New  York  City;  Wisner  Dairy  Supply  Company,  217  Greenwich 


313 

street,  New  York  City;  D,  H.  Growing  Company,  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  sell  all  kinds 
of  dairy  supplies. 

The  Department  of  Agriculture  report  their  supply  of  Bulletins  of  Cheese 
Factories  and  Creameries  exhausted. 

Fifty  new  Branches  of  Dairymen's  League  reported. 

Situation  improving  every  day. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Wednesday  Sept.  27,  KU6  No.  7 

October  first  is  next  Sunday. 

Get  ready  to  skim  your  milk  or  make  it  into  cheese. 

Little  Falls  Dairy  Company,  co-operative  plant,  will  receive  1,000  cans  of 
milk  next  'Sunday  morning. 

Wanted  at  once,  organizers  for  Borden  territory  in  Ofcsego  County. 

Cortland  County  reports  Borden  plants  will  not  have  a  cup  of  milk  October 
1st. 

Is  everybody  happy  ? 

If  not,  work  for  the  League  and  you  will  be. 

Everybody  on  the  jump.    Get  busy. 

The  Dairymen's  League  contract  is  right.    Make  the  dealers  sign  it. 

Stiffen  up  the  backbone  of  a  few  shirkers. 

The  Trustees  of  Otsego  Counity  Farm  Bureau  have  told  their  Manager  he 
has  no  business  in  the  milk  fight. 

Borden  contributes  to  the  Farm  Bureau  in  Otsego  County. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

Thursday  Sept.  28,  1916  No.  8 

Chicago  farmers  win. 
Dealers  meet  their  demands. 

Olover  Farms  say  it  is  not  their  intention  to  buy  any  milk  through  an  agent 
but  will  deal  direct  with  the  farmer. 

It  is  the  League,  more  than  our  price,  that  worries  them. 

Organization  will  bring  the  price. 

The  producer's  salvation  is  the  League. 

Pennsylvania  reports  fine  progress. 

Onondaga  County  is  solid- 

The  Large  Companies  are  now  working  all  kinds  of  schemes  to  get  milk. 


314 

Chicago  won  April  1,  1916,  and  has  Avon  October  1,  1916. 

It  is  up  to  you  what  New  York  will  do. 

SIGN  No  CONTRACTS. 

Deliver  no  milk  Oct.  1st  or  after,  until  notified  by  League. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

Friday  Sept.  29,  1916  No.  9 

FOUR  DEALERS,  representing  EIGHT  PLANTS,  have  signed  the  League  con- 
tract. 

Names  could  not  be  secured  on  the  phone  last  night. 

Borden  pays   the    Chicago   farmers'   price   for   six   months. 

Thirty-four  counties  in  New  York  State  are  solid. 

October  1st  will  be  a  dry  Sunday  in  most  of  the  larger  dealers'  plant*. 

MAKE  IT  DRYER  YET. 

The  farmers  suffered  a  drought  in  August. 

•Someone  else  will  experience  one  in  October. 

The  Borden's  won't  have  much  to  do,  no  milk  and  drivers  on  a  strike. 

Beware  of  October  list. 

No  contract,  No  milk. 

Picket  every  plant  Sunday  morning. 

Report  to  43 -W,  Little  Falls,  N.  Y. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletm  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Saturday  Sept.  30,  1916  No  10 

Local  Branches.  Do  not  make  contracts.  Dealers  must  apply  for  contracts 
to  Executive  Committee. 

Dealers  are  accumulating  surplus  milk  at  extravagant  prices  rather  than 
allow  thie  farmer  to  put  a  price  on  his  own  property. 

This  surplus  will  last  but  a  short  time. 

Stand  firm  for  the  price. 

Deliver  no  milk  until  notified  by  the  Executive  Committee  that  the  dealer 
lias  signed  Dairymen's  League  Contract. 

Jefferson  County  Dairymen's  Association  will  stand  by  the  League  and  ita 
price.  Have  wired  Ullman  &  Hauk  that  they  will  deliver  no  milk  to  their 
six  plants  in  Jefferson  County  after  September  30th  unless  they  sign  th« 
Dairymen's  League  Contract. 

Otsego  County  is  organizing  rapidly.     Everyone  who  can,  help. 

The  Bulletin  wishes  to  retract  its  statement  to  the  effect  that  the  Di- 
rectors of  the  Farm  Bureau  of  Otsego  County  had  told  their  Manager  "  he  bad 


315 

no  business  in  the  milk  fight."  Mr.  Barlow,  Farm  Bureau  Manager,  assures 
us  it  is  untrue  and  that  the  Farm  Bureau  is  in  sympathy  with  the  League 
movement. 

Standard  Dairy  Company  offered  their  pa^rona  in  Oayuga  County  the  League 
price. 

Oayuga  County  is  lined  up  solid  and  will  deliver  no  milk  unless  dealer  signa 
Dairymen's  League  Contract. 

St.  Lawrence  County  is  well  to  the  front. 

Hang  tight  to  the  League.  It's  your  weapon  against  the  profitless  prices  of 
the  .past. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAEBYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Monday  Oct.  2,  1916  No.  11 

October  1st. — And  not  a  single  Branch  reported  faltering. 

Dairymen's  League  is  supplying  about  12  per  cent  of  New  York  City's  milk. 
Large  dealers  are  getting  about  three  per  cent  of  their  usual  amount. 

Fifteen  smaller  dealers  have  signed  Dairymen's  League  contracts. 

McDermott  is  trying  to  buy  output  of  the  cheese  factories  in  St.  Lawrence 
County.  But  with  no  success. 

St.  Lawrenoe  County  Dairymen's  Association  ;have  voted,  to  a  man,  to  stand 
solid  back  of  the  League. 

Bordens  at  Earlville,  Madison  County,  sent  their  team  out  to  collect  milk. 
Team  came  back  with  nine  cans  carefully  covered  with  canvas  to  protect  them 
from  frost.  Upon  investigation  cans  found  to  be  empties. 

Masked  men  held  up  milk  wagons  at  North  Winfield,  Herkimer  County,  Sun- 
day. Farmers  give  notice  they  will  take  no  more  chances.  Say  they  can't 
afford  to  deliver  milk  unless  company  will  protect  them  against  loss  from  such 
hold-ups. 

Phoenix  Cheese  Company,  Cedarville,  Herkimer  County,  couldn't  run  on  two 
cans  of  milk,  so  decided  to  shut  down. 

Sheffield  Farms  are  trying  to  scare  the  farmers  by  sending  out  letters  signed 
by  their  attorney. 

Don't  Scare! 

Cattaraugus  County  has  come  into  the  League  with  800  members  and  12,000 
cows.  More  coming  by  the  minute. 

Sehuyler  and  Wyoming  counties  are  now  on  the  League  map. 

Seven  new  branches  in  Allegany  County.     More  to  follow. 

Secretary's  records  show  the  League  strength  increasing  approximately 
3,000  eows  daily. 

Keep  plugging  until  your  particular  section  is  solid.  Remember  in  unity 
there  is  strength. 

The  eyes  of  the  entire  country  are  upon  you.  Show  that  you  have  the  true 
spirit  of  the  American  manhood. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


316 

Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Tuesday  Oct.  3,  1916  No.  12 

There  is  only  one  ALMIGHTY. 

It  is  not  Bordens  or  the  Sheffield  Farms. 

Don't  Resort  to  Violence.    It  will  Hurt  Our  Cause. 

The  Milk  situation  is  becoming  acute.  The  common  people  and  officers  are 
commencing  to  look  into  the  matter. 

The  Executive  Committee  was  in  conference  nearly  all  night. 

Pay  no  attention  to  the  threats  or  cajoleries  of  the  big  dealers. 

For  sixty  years  you  have  sold  milk  to  Bordens  at  their  price. 

Has  it  been  a  fair  price? 

Now  is  the  time  to  shake  off  their  despotism  and  get  a  fair  price  for  your 
product. 

Some  of  the  big  dealers  are  trying  to  bait  you  by  offering  prices  as  high  and 
even  a  little  higher  than  the  League  is  asking  for  October  milk. 

WHY? 

They  think  a  lot  of  fellows  will  fall  for  it,  thereby  breaking  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  League. 

Don't  Fall  For  It  After  the  first  month  you'll  be  worse  off  than  ever.  They 
will  then  pay  you  what  they  please.  As  they  have  in  the  past. 

Insist  that  they  sign  contracts  for  six  months  —  recognizing  nothing  less  — 
and  they  must  make  their  contracts  with  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Dairymen's  League. 

They  are  doing  the  same  thing  we  are  asking  for  in  other  places. 

Why  can't  they  do  it  here  ? 

They  will, —  if  you  stick  together. 

The  League  is  growing  stronger  every  day.  Cattaraugus  County  has  1,000 
members  and  14,000  cow®. 

Jefferson  County  Dairymen's  Association  at  Ellisburg,  held  indignation 
meeting  because  the  Jefferson  County  Creamery  Company  shipped  to  Borden  — 
and  will  join  the  League  200  strong. 

Stick  to  the  League.    It  is  your  duty  and  salvation. 

Keep  on  the  jump.  Look  for  the  weak  spots  in  your  branch  and  strengthen 
them. 

WORK  !    WE  WILL  FIGHT  EVERY  INCH. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


317 

Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Wednesday  Oct.  4,  1916  Mo.  13 

NEW  YORK  PAPERS  PREDICT  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE  VICTORY 
The  Executive  Committee  of  the  League  is  still  out  of  jail,  in  spite  of  the 
prediction  of  the  Big  Dealers,  and  held  a  highly  satisfactory  conference  with 
Mayor  Mitchel. 

New  York  City's  milk  supply  for  Monday  was  sixty  per  cent;    Tuesday 
fifty  per  cent;  Wednesday  thirty  per  cent. 

The  League  has  offered  to  fill  orders  for  the  "  starving  babies  and  invalids  " 
and  is  in  a  position  to  supply  the  hospitals  with  their  usual  amount  of  milk. 
Horton  of  the  Sheffield  Farms  has  spent  thousands  of  dollars  to  give  a  few 
words  to  the  farmers  about  milk. 

If  Mr.  Horton  would  visit  some  of  his  stations  today,  he  would  learn  some 
new  things  about  milk,  and  about  farmers,  without  cost. 

Bordens  declare  the  League  is  trying  to  usurp  the  function  of  the  dealers. 
The  League  will  no  longer  allow  the  dealer  to  usurp  the  rights  of  the 
producer. 

The  organization  is  spreading  like  wild  fire. 
Hang  tight  —  make  them  com>e  across  with  the  six  months  contract  at  our 

price. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Thursday  Oct.  5,  1916  No.  14 

Bordens  making  overtures  separate  from  the  other  large  dealers  by  offering 
incease  of  fifteen  cents  a  hundred. 

Nothing  Doing. 

Executive  Committee  rejected  proposal  submitted  by  Delegation  of  Dealers 
to  Mayor  Mitchel. 

Executive  Committee  told  Mayor  Mitchel  that  the  League  would  absolutely, 
under  no  circumstances  change  the  price  it  has  set. 

Court  appointed  Judge  Dykman  referee  to  take  evidence  for  ascertaining 
cost  of  production  of  milk,  commencing  Monday  morning. 

Farm  Bureau  Managers  be  prepared  to  submit  figures  of  your  surveys. 
Mail  at  once  data  to  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets,  showing  factories 
taken  into  consideration. 

Wednesday,  Mayor  Mitchel  said  he  was  powerless  to  effect  a  settlement 
between  producers-  and  dealers. 

Wednesday  most  critical  day.    Executive  Committee  delivered  its  ultimatum. 

Back  it  up. 


318 

Board  of  Health  has  called  upon  Leagi*e  to  supply  6,000  quarts  Pasteurized 
milk  for  12,000'  babies.  We  will  furnish  it. 

Fort  Plain  Milk  and  Creamery  Company  are  selling  to  Brown  &  Bailey. 

Lacona  selling  to  Empire  State  Dairy  Company. 

Massena   supplying  large   quantity  to   Beakes  Dairy   Company. 

Stop  it! 

Thursday  and  Friday  is  when  the  big  test  will  come.    Hold  Fast. 

Executive  Committee  confident  big  dealers  are  sweating  blood.     It  will  do 
them  good. 

Don't  believe  all  you  see  in  the  papers.     It  is  a  bitter  fight  to  the  finish. 
Do  your  part. 

Wire  or  telephone  reports  to  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Bulletin  No.  15 

Dealers1  have  met  our  October  prices. 

Deadlock  on  six  months  contract. 

Don't  be  disturbed  by  rumors.  Don't  believe  what  Bordenis  or  any  other 
dealers  tell  you.  They  are  trying  all  .kinds  of  schemes  to  cause  a  break  in 
our  ranks.  Receive  instructions  only  from  the  Executive  Committee. 

Tie  up  every  drop  of  milk. 

Bordene  have  raised  their  price  twice  in  one  day. 

Fight  for  your  life  and  your  children.  Victory  will  depend  on  what  you  do. 
Believe  only  the  newspapers  which  you  know  publish  the  truth. 

Use  every  honorable  means  to  keep  milk  out  of  Sheffield  Farms  plants. 

Executive  Committee  held  long  conference  with  Attorney-General  Woodbury 
Thursday.  Executive  Committee  at  Mayor's  office  absolutely  refused  to  con- 
sider anything  but  six  month®  agreement. 

Victory  will  mean  forty-five  cents  a  hundred  .pounds  more  to  you  than  last 
year. 

Keep  Executive  Committee  informed  by  wire.  We  must  know  what  is  going 
on  in  the  country. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Bulletin  No.  16 

Executive  Committee  were  busy  signing  up  contracts  and  sending  telegrams 
all  day  yesterday.  Last  night  they  were  in  conference  with  some  of  the  dealers 
all  night. 

The  following  are  some  of  the  companies  who  have  signed  up: 

Newark  Milk  and  Cream  Company 

National  Dairy  Company 

New  York  Dairy  and  Produce  Company 

Rider  &  Company 

Empire  'State  Dairy  Company 

High  Ground  Dairy  Company 

Central  Dairy  Company 

Zellner  Brothers 

Standard  Dairy  Company 

Ullman  &  Hauk 


319 

Direct  all  energies  on  Bordens,  Sheffield  Farms,  McDermott  Mutual  Company, 
Stevens  Company  and  Brown  &  Bailey. 

Hang  tight  to  the  League  and  make  them  come  across  for  six  months. 

In  1882  you  accepted  their  price  for  one  month.    And  you  lost  your  fight. 

Don't  compromise. 

State  Milk  Investigation  will  probably  commence  Thursday. 

The  League  stands  ready  to  furnish  milk  for  the  children.  If  they  suffer 
from  the  lack  of  it,  it  is  the  fault  of  the  big  dealers.  Your  children  have  gone 
without  advantages  for  forty  years  because  you  failed  to  stand  firmly  together 
and  demand  fair  prices  for  your  milk. 

Now  is  your  chance.  Don't  throw  it  away  by  breaking  ranks  and  letting 
them  fool  you  into  accepting  their  price  for  one  month. 

As  soon  as  a  dealer  sign®  up!,  telegrams  will  be  sent  to  all  the  stations 
from  the  Executive  Committee  in  New  York.  Pay  no  'attention  to  others. 
They  are  ruses  to  get  your  milk. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 

Monday  Oct.  9,  1916  No.  17 

More  dealers  are  signing  up  every  day.     Nearly  a  hundred  companies  are 
now  on  our  lists. 

Bordens,  Sheffield  Farms,  McDermott  Mutual,  Stevens  &  Company  are  still 
of  the  opinion  that  they  can  break  us. 

Hallock,  of  the  Bordens,  has  visions  of  importing  a  dairy  and  producing  milk 
for  New  York  City  at  a  lower  cost  than  we  are  asking. 

We  would  suggest  that  Mr.  Hallock  peruse  reports  of  the  Wicks  Investigation 
Committee  and  then  see  if  his  dreams  have  the  same  charms. 

New  York  City  is  now  receiving  about  46  per  cent  of  its  normal  supply  of 
milk  through  the  League. 

Stand  close  to  the  League.     Pay  no  attention  to  the  reports  circulated  by 
various  large  dealers. 

The  time  is  no  more  when  the  big  dealers  will  dictate  our  prices  for  us. 
Every  man  see  that  the  Borden,   Sheffield  Farms,   Stevens  or  McDermott 
plants  in  your  neighborhood  get  no  milk. 
Wring  them  dry! 

You  will  be  informed  by  Executive  Committee  in  New  York  as  soon  as  any  of 
the  companies  sign  up. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


320 

Post  This  Bulletin  Where  All  Your  Members  Can  Read  It 
OFFICIAL  BULLETIN 

of 

THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE 
Tuesday  Oct.  10,  1916  No.  Ifi 

The  telegram  sent  out  from  New  York  signed  by  President  Brill  of  the 
Dairymen's  League  was  misunderstood.  It  referred  to  milk  not  already  con- 
tracted for,  and  urged  the  farmers  to  hold  that  milk  until  released  by  the 
Executive  Committee. 

The  Executive  Oommittee  has  been  signing  contracts  just  as  fast  as  they 
could  take  care  of  them. 

All  contracts  are  made  for  six  months  —  notwithstanding  the  newspaper 
reports  —  and  all  contracts  are  made  alike. 

Keep  hammering  on  Sheffield  Farms,  Bordens,  McDermott  Mutual,  Brown  & 
Bailey  and  Stevens. 

We  have  made  some  inroad  on  the  Sheffield  Farms  supply  of  milk.  Cork  it 
up  entirely. 

There  is  no  truth  in  the  report  that  there  has  been  a  "  split "  in  the  Execu- 
tive Committee  or  Board  of  Directors  of  the  League.  They  are  fighting  side  by 
side  for  the  cause. 

The  Attorney-General's  investigation  was  postponed  this  morning  because 
ol  a  death  in  the  family  of  'Senator  Lewis,  who  is  deputy  attorney-general. 

A  director  of  a  bank  in  New  Jersey  refused  to  hold  his  milk.  The  farmers 
pulled  $60,0'00  out  of  the  bank  and  refused  to  place  it  on  deposit  again  until 
that  director  had  resigned  from  the  bank. 

The  following  are  a  few  of  the  companies  who  have  signed  contracts: 

Ideal  Dairy  Company 

International  Milk  Products  Company 

Henry  Arnstein 

Kinney  Brothers 

Theodore  Pi-Hens 

Wohlman 

Tiejen  Brothers 

Purity  Milk  Company 

Normandie  Milk  Company 

And  many  others. 

Reports  from  all  over  the  State  indicate  that  the  farmers  are  standing  solid. 
Keep  working.  They  are  coming  fast. 


Bulletin  No.  19 

Milk  from  about  20  plants  was  sold  Tuesday. 

Wanted:  Five  hundred  cans  of  milk  in  Southern  New  York  to  be  shipped 
to  Harrisburg. 

Sheffield  Farm®  Milk  supply  greatly  decreased  Tuesday.  Bordens  supply 
remains  about  the  same. 

Attorney-General's  investigation  into  large  companies  is  on  for  Wednesday. 
It  will  be  interesting. 


321 

The  Sheffield  Farms  Company  lias  invoked  the  Court  to  break  the  Dairymen's 
Leagiie  because  we  dared  to  ask  more  for  our  milk. 

Don't  let  them  have  a  drop  of  your  milk.  When  your  milk  is  released  by 
the  Executive  Committee,  do  not  hold  it  back.  Deliver  all  the  Borden,  Sheffield 
Karma,  Mutual  McDermott,  .Stevens,  and  Brown  and  Bailey  milk  you  can  to 
the  dealers  icfio  have  signed  League  Contracts. 

W-hen  in  doubt  or  want  information,  get  in  touch  with  the  Executive 
Committee. 

We  are  gaining  steadily  every  day. 

They  are  your  gains. 

It  is  up  to  You  to  back  up  the  demands  of  the  Executive  Committee. 


Bulletin  No.  20 

DISREGARD  ALL  INSTRUCTIONS  EXCEPT  THOSE  COMING  FROM  CHAIRMAN 
COOPER  OF  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE. 

Last  night  President  Brill's  office  sent  out  telegrams  releasing  all  milk, — 
without  the  contracts  being  signed. 

The  Executive  Committee  Avere  unable  to  get  President  Brill's  office  last 
night. 

Executive  Committee  immediately  sent  out  telegrams  to  the  effect  that 
Bordens  and  other  large  Companies  had  not  signed  contracts  as  reported  by 
Brill. 

BEWARE  of  advices  of  such  agreement.  We  fear  treachery.  President  Brill 
lias  not  been  working  with  the  rest  of  the  Executive  Committee,  and  has  pro- 
longed the  settlement  of  the  milk  fight. 

The  Board!  of  Directors  has  delegated  to  the  Executive  Committee  full 
power  to  release  milk. 

Directors'  meeting  called  for  Thursday  night  at  Murray  Hill  Hotel,  New 
York  City. 

Now  is  the  time  to  show  your  spirit. 

Stick!     Back  up  the  Executive  Committee  every  step. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Bulletin  No.  21 
DELIVER  No  MILK  To 

Bordens,  Sheffield  Farms,  'Stevens,  Mutual  McDermott,  Locust  Farms,  Alex. 
Campbell,  Brown  &  Bailey,  Beakes  and  -several  other  large  companies. 

THEY  HAVE  NOT  SIGNED  CONTRACTS. 

At  a  Director's  meeting  last  night  President  Brill's  resignation  iva-s 
unanimously  demanded  and  he  was  prohibited  from  representing  the  League, 
incurring  any  expense  or  entering  into  any  obligation  in  its  behalf. 

President's  power  was-  delegated  to  R.  D.  Cooper. 

Brill's  telegrams  caused  no  break  in  the  ranks. 

Bordens  are  nearly  out  of  breath  chasing  milk. 

They  are  reported  as  offering  T1/^  cents  per  quart  for  milk. 

The  Executive  Committee  is  still  selling  milk  for  the  League. 

Sheffield  Farms'  action  against  the  League  adjourned  one  week. 

11 


822 

Show  your  confidence  in  your  Executive  Committee  and  Directors  by  stand- 
ing back  to  back  and  fighting. 

Disregard   al'l   telegrams   except  (those   from   Executive   Committee   in   New 
York. 

For  information  phone  or  wire  Executive  Committee  at  204  Franklin  street 
during  the  day  and  the  Murray  Hi  1-1  Hotel,  New  York  City,  at  night. 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 


Bulletin  No.  22 

The  last  battery  has  given  away.  The  Dairymen's  League  has  won  a  complete 
victory. 

There  are  a  few  scattering  companies  who  have  not  yet  signed  League 
contracts. 

The  Executive  Committee  has  received  many  letters*  and  telegrams  which  it 
has  been  unable  to  answer.  Same  will  receive  attention  as  early  as  possible. 

The  League  on  behalf  of  its  18,000  members,  wishes,  ait  this  time,  to  thank 
all  Farm  Bureau  Managers  in  New  York  >and  other  states,  who  have  rendered 
such  valuable  services  in  the  fight  against  the  so-called  milk  trust. 

This  work  should  never  be  forgotten  by  dairymen  in  the  counties  where 
these  hustlers  labored.  The  mi  ilk  dealers'  may  Later  attempt  to  smother 
appropriations  for  these  Bureaus.  Don't  allow  it. 

In  the  flush  of  victory  we  must  not  rest.  We  must  tighten  and  systematize 
our  organization. 

STAND  ALWAYS  READY.    ETERNAL  VIGILANCE  Is  THE  PRICE  WE  PAY. 

Be  prepared  for  April  1st. 

Join  the  League.    Pay  up  the  assessments. 

WHAT  HAS  THE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE  DONE  FOR  You  ? 

EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE  DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE. 

ALLEGED  ILLEGALITY  OF  THE  METHODS 

In  order  that  the  situation  may  be  fully  understood,  it  should 
be  borne  in  mind  that  article  22  of  the  Consolidated  General  Busi- 
ness Law  of  the  State  of  New  York  provides : 

"  Section  34-01.  Every  contract,  agreement,  arrangement  or 
combination  whereby  a  monopoly  in  the  manufacture,  pro- 
duction or  sale  in  this  State  of  any  article  or  commodity  of 
common  use  is  or  may  be  created,  established  or  maintained 
or  whereby  competition  in  this  State  in  the  supply  or  price 
of  any  such  article  or  commodity  is  or  may  be  restrained  or 
prevented,  or  whereby  for  the  purpose  of  creating,  establish- 
ing or  maintaining  a  monopoly  within  this  State  of  the  manu- 
facture, production  or  sale  of  any  such  article,  commodity, 
the  free  pursuit  in  this  State  of  any  lawful  business,  trade 


323 

or  occupation,  is  or  may  be  restricted  or  prevented  is  hereby 
declared  to  be  against  public  policy,  illegal  and  void. 

Section  341.  Penalty.  Every  person  or  corporation  or  any 
officer  or  agent  thereof  who  shall  make  or  attempt  to  make 
OF  enter  into  any  such  contract,  agreement,  arrangement  or 
combination,  or  who  within  this  State  shall  do  any  act  pur- 
suant thereto  or  in,  toward  or  for  the  con>summation  thereof 
wherever  the  same  may  have  been  made  is  guilty  of  a  misde- 
meanor," etc. 

Section  342  provides  that  such  acts  shall  be  restrained  and 
prevented. 

The  admitted  purpose  of  the  League  was  to  control  the  sale  of 
milk  in  this  State.  It  is  claimed  that  this  law  was  violated  by  the 
methods  disclosed  in  the  foregoing  bulletins  and  documents,  yet 
there  was  no  disinterested  person  in  this  -State  who  thought  that 
that  law  should  be  enforced  in  the  situation,  then  existing. 

First. —  It  was  conceded  that  the  movement  had  become  an 
economic  necessity. 

Second. —  The  officers  in  all  their  proceedings  seemed  to  ask 
only  reasonable  and  just  relief,  consequently  a  law  that  sought  to 
prohibit  the  working  out  of  economic  forces  fell  into  disusei  and 
thereby  it  should  come  to  be  clearly  understood  for  the  reasons 
hereafter  advanced  that  a  substitute  for  a  useless  law  must  be  pro- 
vided. Such  substitute  must  come  in  the  form  of  State  supervision 
and  study  of  such  movements.  The  subsequent  operations  of  this 
movement  and  the  history  of  its  development  from  day  to  day  we 
take  from  the  report  of  the  president  of  the  Dairymen's  League 
and  testimony  subsequently  given  by  him  to  this  Committee. 

Report  of  Jacob  S.  Brill,  President,  Dairymen  s  League 

"At  a  meeting  at  which  I  was  elected  I  told  the  board  I  would 
accept  the  office  only  on  the  condition  that  I  was  to  have  a  free 
hand  in  anv  negotiations  growing  out  of  the  movement.  The  fol- 

t/  O  C5  O 

lowing  letter  sent  to  all  directors  on  September  2d  explains  itself. 
There  were  no  replies  disapproving  of  my  action. 


324 

POUGHKEEPSIE,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  2,  1916. 
To  the  Directors  of  the  Dck-ry  men's  League: 

At  your  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors  at  Albany  on  Monday,,  August 
31st,  I  was  waited  on  by  a  committee  from  your  board  advising1  me  that  1 
was  unanimously  called  by  your  board  to  represent  the  Dairymen's  League  as 
its  president  and  leader.  On  being  brought  before  you  I  said,  '  I  appreciate 
thoroughly  this  very  great  responsibility  imposed  upon  me  by  your  honorable 
board  to  represent  the  members  of  the  Dairymen's  League.  I  wish  it  distinctly 
understood  that  I  must  haA^e  a  perfectly  free  hand  in  the  administration  of 
the  affairs  of  the  League  at  this  critical  moment.' 

I  told  you  that  I  felt  able  and  thoroughly  capable  to  throw  myself  into  this 
work,  to  handle  this  great  situation  and  to  help  get  a  living  price  for  the 
milk  producing  farmers  who  are  members  of  the  League,  and  that  I  wanted 
your  full  support  and  co-operation  in  this  very  great  work.  I  further  said  that 
I  also  had  an  intimate  acquaintance  with  some  of  the  men  in  prominent  walks 
of  life,  some  of  whom  were  my  personal  friends  and  who  had  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  big  operations  and  affairs  of  this  character  and  that  1  knew 
that  it  would  be  their  ipleasure  to  support  and  counsel  me  at  this  time.  1  told 
you  that  I  was  going  into  this  matter  unreservedly  and  everything  in  my 
power  that  I  could  command  would  be  brought  together  to  support  me  in 
handling  this  great  situation  for  the  benefit  of  the  farmers'.  As-  further 
reference  to  this  matter  I  will  refer  you  to  the  Sunday  Courier,  copy  of  which 
will  be  mailed  to  you  as  soon  as  it  is  off  the  press. 

After  making  this  statement  to  you  about  myself  there  was  no  opposing 
voice  and  I  understood  that  I  had  your  full  cooperation  and  support.  I  wish 
to  have  you  write  me  or  wire  me  at  once  if  I  am  correct  in  my  understanding. 
I  am  rushing  posters  with  my  photo  to  all  parts  of  the  territory.  My  object 
in  this  is  that  they  may  see  what  your  President  looks  like.  It  would  have 
been  my  pleasure  to  have  gone  into  the  territory  and  met  all  personally  but 
as  the  time  is  so  short  this  was  impossible.  Therefore  this  is  the  best  that 
I  can  do  to  get  before  our  members.  I  am  writing  many  letters  to  get  in  touch 
with  the  presidents  and  secretaries  and  others  in  various  parts  of  the  territory 
asking  them  to  urge  more  people  into  the  league,  put  up  the  posters  and 
send  in  the  money  that  is  laying  back  in  the  local  treasuries. 

It  is  very  essential  that  I  should  have  time  to  get  this  -matter  in  motion 
throughout  the  territory  and  I  shall  urge  that  tire  price  be  held  back  until  I 
can  accomplish  this.  I  find  that  the  way  that  Mr.  Dillon  is  going  at  this 
matter  and  getting  into  the  papers  is  very  confusing  to  many  of  the  members 
and  is1  causing  unrest  which  does  not  work  out  for  the  benefit  of  the  League 
members  As  a  result  of  this1  I  deemed  it  advisable  to  call  our  Executive 
Committee  together,  and  wired  Mr.  Cooper,  chairman  of  the  (Executive  Com- 
mittee, to  do  this.  We  will  meet  here  today  in  Pougiikeepsie  and  go  over 
this  matter  very  carefully.  We  must  be  prepared  for  any  emergency.  In  view 
of  this  fact,  I  have  this  morning  wired  three  great  separator  companies  asking 
them  if  they  were  in  sihape  to  make  immediate  shipment  of  separators  on 
quick  notice.  I  am  doing  this  in  case  there  is  any  delay  in  the  buyers  accept- 
ing our  price  when  it  is  made,  in  which  event,  these  separators  could  be  sent 
to  various  parts  of  the  territory  where  there  was  any  distress  among  the  mem- 
bers in  caring  for  their  milk.  This  will  help  those  members  who  are  not  in  a 


325 

position  to  take  care  of  themselves.  From  the  way  the  reports  are  coming  to 
me  from  various  sections  I  don't  believe  that  there  will  be  any  necessity  for 
this  arrangement.  However,  I  want  to  be  prepared  for  any  emergency. 

Further,  when  I  hare  gotten  advertising  maitter  through  the  trade  and 
gotten  in  touch  with  the  'situation  ]  would  like  the  Executive  Board  to  place 
in  my  hands  the  price  which  we  will  make.  I  would  like  to  flash  this  over 
the  wires  reaching  all  parts  of  the  territory  at  the  same  time.  Following 
this  the  Executive  Committee  would  take  their  position  at  ome  of  the  promi- 
nent hotels  in  New  York  City  and  there  be  ready  to  sell  their  milk  to  the 
buyers1  who  are  already  handling  the  same,  providing  they  chose  to  give  the 
League  preference. 

It  may  be  necessary  to  have  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors'  perhaps 
some  time  next  week,  so  please  hold  yourself  in  readiness  for  a  quick  call. 
I  would  suggest  that  this  meeting  be  called  at  Albany,  the  siame  place  that 
we  have  had  these  meetings  before.  I  have  tried  to  give  you  a  correct  idea  of 
what  I  have  been  doing  since  my  election  as  president  and  would  ask  again 
that  you  give  me  your  prompt  reply  approving  or  disapproving  of  my  action 
as  your  president  so  far.  Any  suggestions  that  you  have  that  would  be  of 
value  to  us,  I  would  greatly  appreciate. 

Please  answer  this  communication  at  once. 

Very  truly  yours, 

JACOB  S.  BRILL, 
President  Dairymen's  League. 

PRICE  MAKING  BY  DAIRYMEN 

It  would  be  advisable  to  add  to  last  year's  winter  Borden  price  of  45c  per 
hundred  instead  of  47c.  The  price,  therefore,  which  we  will  set  for  'Grade  B 
milk  in  the  First  District  is  as  follows: 

October $2  15 

November 2  25 

December 2  25 

January 2  15 

February 2  10 

March 2  05 

Three  cents  per  hundred  pound's  added  for  each  one-tenth  poinit  increase  in 
butter-fat. 

These  making  an  average  of  $2.15  5^6  on  milk  for  3  per  cent  butter-fat  which 
would  make  Grade  B  milk  in  the  Second  District  10  cents  less. 

Agreement  No.  1 

AGREEMENT  MADE  THIS  7th  day  of  October,  1916',  between  the  Dairymen's 
League,  a  corporation  organized  under  the  Laws  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey 
as  agent,  party  of  the  first  part,  and  the  undersigned  milk  distributers  located 
in  New  York  City,  parties  of  the  second  part,  witnesseth: 

The  parties  hereto  in  consideration  of  the  premises*  herein  and  the  sum  of 
One  Dollar  by  each  to  the  other  in  hand  paid,  the  receipt  whereof  is.  hereby 
acknowledged,  do  hereby  mutually  promise  and  agree  a»  follows-: 

1.  The  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  sell  and  deliver  at  various  shipping 
s-tations'  and  creameries  of  the  parties  of  the  second  part,  and  the  parties  of 
the  second  part  agree  to  take  and  pay  for  as  hereinafter  provided,  each  day 


326 

during  the  period  covered  by  this  contract,  all  of  the  milk  produced  by  the 
members  of  the  party  of  the  first  part  from  whom  the  party  of  the  second 
part  is  now  or  has  been  receiving  milk  if  not  previously  sold,  and  such  addi- 
tional quantity  of  milk  required  by  the  second  parities,  skall  if  possible,  be 
obtained  from  the  party  of  itibe  first  part.  It  is  understood  that  all  milk  sold 
under  (the  agreement  shall  be  of  good  quality,  and  wnsk  pass*  the  inspection 
and  approval  of  the  authorities  of  the  State  of  New  York  and  municipality 
of  New  York  City. 

2.  The  parties  of  'the  second  part  agree  to  pay  to  the  parity  of  the  first 
part  for  all  milk  received  by  it  at  its  said  stations  from  the  party  of  the  first 
part  the  following1  schedule  of  minimum  prices1  for  Grade  B  milk  testing  3 
per  cent  butter-fat: 

Firsit  Dist.     Second  Dist. 

October $2  15  $2  05 

November 2  25  215 

December 2  25  2  15 

January 2  25  2  05 

February 2  10  2  00 

March 2  05  1  95 

per  hundred  pounds. 

Three  cents  per  hundred  pound's  of  milk  added  for  each  one-tenth  increase 
in  butter-fat. 

Grade  C  milk  10c  less  per  hundred  pounds  as  heretofore. 

3.  The  party  of  the  second  pant  hereby  agrees  to  pay  on  or  before  the  10th 
day  of  each  month  for  all  milk  received  by  it  from  the  16th  day  up  to  and 
including  the  last  day  inclusive  of  the  previous  month,  and  also  agrees  to  pay 
on  or  before  the  25th  day  of  the  month  for  all  milk  received  by  it  between  the 
1st  and  Kith  day  inclusive  of  the  current  month,  or  as  has  been  the  custom  of 
each  of  the  distributers  herein.    The  parties  of  the  second  part  further  agree 
out  of  the  purchase  price  aforesaid  to  pay  the  sum'  of  one  cent  per  hundred 
pounds  to  the  treasurer  of  the  Dairymen's  League  at  his  office  at  'Sussex,  New 
Jersey,  or  Iris  successor  where  the  said  successor  may  have  his  office,  and  the 
balance  of  the  purchase  price  to  the  producers1  of  the  said  milk. 

4.  It  is  further  understood  that  in  'case  the  panties1  of  the  second  part  have 
not  filed  with  the  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  or  with  other  proper  authority 
the  bond  required  by  law  for  a  milk  gathering  station,  then  it  is  agreed  that 
each  of  the  parties  of  the  second  part  is  to  furnish  the  .party  of  the  first  part 
with  a  surety  company  bond,  satisfactory  in  form  to  the  party  of  the  first  part 
in  the  sum  of  not  less  dollars 
conditioned  upon  the  prompt  payment  of  all  moneys  due  or  to  become  due 
under  this  agreement  and  for  the  whole  performance  of  this  agreement  accord- 
ing to  its  terms. 

5.  It  is  further  understood  and  agreed  that  this  contract  is  to  begin  and 
take  effect  on  the  7th  day  of  October,  191'6,  and  to  'Continue  for  a  period  of 
six  months  from  that  date. 

6.  THE  PRICES  SET  FORTH  IN  PARAGRAPH  TWO  HEREOF  FOB  THE  MONTHS  OF 
JANUARY,  FEBRUARY  AND  MARCH,  1917,  SHALL  BE  SUBJECT  TO  REVISION  AND 


327 

MODIFICATION  BY  AN  ARBITRATION  BOARD  to  be  appointed  as  hereinafter  pro- 
vided upon  condition  that  said  board  shall  decide  that  said  prices  shall  exceed 
the  actual  cost  of  production  of  said  milk  during  said  months  plus  a  reason- 
able profit  thereon.  Said  board  shall  consist  of  five  members  who  shall  be 
appointed  as  follows :  Two  members  by  ea-ch  of  the  parties  hereto  and  the 
fifth  member  by  the  said  four  members  thus  appointed. 

IN  WITNESS  WHEREOF  the  Dairymen's  League  has  hereunto  signed  its  official 
signature  by  K.  D.  Cooper  of  its  Executive  Committee  and  the  .party  of  the 
second  part  has  hereunto  set  his  hand  and  seal. 

DAIRYMEN'S  LEAGUE, 

By  R.  D.  COOPER. 
In  the  presence  of 

F.  H.  THOMPSON. 

The  Empire  State  Dairy  Co.,  C.  Neidner,  Vice-Pres. 

Wan.  Burgers,  for  Standard  Dairy  Company. 

Central  Dairy  Co.,  by  Charles  Vonhof,  Jr.,  Sec'y. 

New  Yo<rk  Dairy  Produce  Co.,  Wm.  J.  Blair,  Pres. 

National  Dairy  Co.,  by  Chris.  Oher. 

James  C.  Ridner  &  Co.,  George  W.  Rider,  Sec'y. 

Zellner  Bros.,  Inc.,  by  Jacob  Zellner. 

Ul'lman  &  Hank  Dairy  Co.,  by  C,  Hauk. 

Mr.  Brill's   Statement 

The  following  is  the  agreement  entered  into  by  all  of  the  big  companies.  In 
it  there  are  no  misleading  phrases*,  but  it  is  just  what  it  pretend®  to  be  and 
it  covers  the  case  in  a  reasonably  thorough  manner.  It  is  not  a  contract  and 
is  not  signed,  but  is  a  "  Gentleman's  agreement."  The  fifth  clause  was  put 
in  by  the  Borden  Company  and  crossed  out  and  wTas>  in  no  sense  or  way  what- 
soever binding,  but  served  as  a  warning  as  to  what  we  would  be  up  against 
in  the  spring.  It  was  waived  by  both  parties'.  The  second  clause  governing 
the  Committee  was-  eminently  fair  and  just  to  all  .parties  concerned  as  well  as 
1  the  public.  What  I  have  always  'Contended  that  we  demanded  was  A  SQUARE 
DEAL  and  a  Committee  appointed  by  those  powers  would  have  been  impartial 
and  just,  and  its  findings  would  carry  weight  and  be  respected. 

Agreement  No.  2  Made  October  11,   1916I 
(Not  in  force) 

Mr.  Brill,  as  president  of  the  Dairymen's  League,  proposed  the  following 
settlement  of  the  present  milk  controversy,  and  will  release  all  milk  of  Bor- 
den's  former  patrons  upon  the  public  announcement  of  the  Borden  Company, 
and  the  sending  of  notices  to  its  patrons  of  the  following  program1: 

1.  Announcement  of  price  for  November  and  December  milk  at  45c  per  cwifc. 
increase  over  last  year's  prices. 

2.  That  the  prices  to  be  paid  by  the  Borden  Company  for  January,  Febru- 
ary and  March,  1916,  will  be  left  to  arbitration  by  a  committee  of  representa- 
tive men,  none  of  whom  shall  be  holders  of  public  office,  to  be  appointed  in 
the  following  manner : 


328 

One  member  by  the  Governor. 

One  member  by  the  Mayor. 

One  member  by  the  Commissioner  of  Health. 

One  member  by  the  Chamber  of  Coinaneroe  of  Rochester. 

One  member  by  the  Merchants'  Association. 

Two  members  by  the  Dealers. 

Two  members  by  the  Dairymen's  League. 

3.  Prices  for   said   months,    as   determined   by   said   committee,    shall    not 
exceed  45c  per  cwt.  over  last  year's  prices  for  the  corresponding  period. 

4.  Surplus  production  during  said  period,  in  excess  of  Borden's  require- 
ments for  its  Farm  Products  Division,  to  be  paid  for  on  the  following  basis: 
If  in  any  month  or  months  the  Borden  Company  shall  fail  to  sell  in  its  Farm 
Products  Division  all  milk  received  by  that  Division,  such  surplus-  of  milk  not 
so  disposed  of,  shall  be  paid  for  at  the  market  price  for  cheese  or  butter  of 
92  score,  as  published  in  the  Producers'  Price  Current  for  the  month,  with  a 
charge  of  Ic  per  pound  for  manufacture,  with  the  understanding  that  the  Bor- 
den Company  has  the  privilege,  if  it  so  desires,  of  (shipping  this  milk  of  its 
plants  for  the  manufacture  into  condensed  or  evaporated  milk,  at  prices  as 
fixed  in>  paragraph  No1.  2,  less  an  allowance  to  be  made  to  it  of  the  freight 
involved  in  the  transfer  from  one  point  to  the  other.     (Note. —  The  following: 
clause  is  waived  and  not  valid.) 

5.  Milk  to  be  purchasted  subsequent  to  March,  1016,  on  a  monthly  basis, 
the  Borden  Company  announcing  its  price  for  such  subsequent  months  not 
later  than  the  15th  day  of  the  preceding  month. 

6.  The  Borden  Company  to  be  at  all  times  free  and  unhindered  in  dealing 
directly  with  its  own  patron  farmers1. 

Agreement  No.  3  Made  on  October  14 

(The  only  one  in  force  at  the  present  time  with  the  big  companies) 
Dealers  are  to  announce  to  their  Receiving  Stations!  that  for  the  months  of 
October  to  March  3.1st,  they  will  pay  45c  advance  over  Borden'si  price  for  the 
corresponding  months  of  1915  and  1016,  such  price®  to  be  firm  for  three 
months  (October,  November,  and  December)  and  as  to  January,  February, 
and  March,  1917',  >are  to  be  subjected  to  revision  and  modification  by  a  com- 
mittee which  is.  to  be  appointed:  two  by  the  Dealers,  two  by  the  Producers, 
and  they  to  appoint  a  fifth,  who  are  to  consider  the  cost  of  production,  dis- 
tribution and  market  conditions  and  arrive  at  a  price  fair  and  equitable  to 
both  parties.  This  committee  to  be  appointed  and  organized  within  thirty 
days  from  this  date,  October  14,  1916. 

JACOB  S.  BRILL,  called  as  a  witness  on  December  5,  1916, 
testified : 

"  I  reside  at  Poughquag,  '!N".  Y.  I  own  the  Poughquag  Farms. 
I  am  interested  in  breeding.  Previously  I  was  in  the  wholesale 
grocery  business  in  Newburgh.  I  am  in  the  milk  business.  We 
separate  the  milk  and  feed  the  skim  milk  to  the  young  stock.  I  am 


329 

a  member  of  the  Dairymen's  League.  I  was  elected  President  in 
August  at  an  Albany  meeting  of  the  directors.  I  was  not  an  office 
holder  until  then.  There  were  about  nineteen  directors  present. 
Mr.  Hartshorn  of  Hamilton  had  been  elected  president  a  short  time 
before,  but  had  failed  to  qualify.  Mr.  Culver,  our  Dutchess 
County  Director,  and  Mr.  Frank  Sherman  requested  me  to  come 
to  Albany  and  suggested  I  might  be  chosen  president.  They  held 
their  meeting  in  a  building  in  the  Agriculture  Department  and 
Mr.  Culver  came  over  and  asked  me  to  come  to  the  meeting,  that 
my  name  had  been  suggested  and  they  were  unanimously  for  me. 
I  accepted  the  office.  The  movement  was  intended  to  secure  a,  bet- 
ter price  for  the  farmers.  Methods-  and  ways  were  not  discussed 
at  that  meeting  to  any  great  extent*,  except  that  we  were  to  sell  the 
milk.  It  was  said  that  if  we  did  not  sell  the  milk  <after  our  expe- 
riences of  two  years  before  the  League  would  be  a  failure.  I  didn't 
think  they  could  sell  the  milk  without  holding  the  milk  for  some 
time;  I  didn't  think  it  would  be  possible  to  make  the  sale  at  our 
price  without  holding  the  milk  back.  I  knew  the  general  method 
of  organization  provided  that  it  should  be  held  back  and  the  title 
to  it  held  by  the  League  until  the  League  disposed  of  it,  as  I  read 
their  papers  and  their  contract.  That  was  the  plan  of  the  dairy- 
men when  they  joined,  transfer  the  title  of  their  milk  and  right 
to  sell  it  to  the  corporation  so  the  corporation  would  be  in  the 
position  to  deal  for  all  the  members'  milk  as  owner. 

At  Albany,  we  discussed  plans  for  enlarging  the  field  of  oper- 
ation, getting  new  members  and  sending  out  solicitors.  Those  that 
were  not  in  the  League  should  be  urged  to  join. 

There  was  no  strong  arm  squad  arranged  for  in  any  locality  by 
the  League  to  see  that  those  who  could  not  be  persuaded  amicably 
could  by  other  mean's  hold  back  their  milk.  As  president  of  the 
organization,  I  sent  letters  to  all  the  local  leagues  that  they  could 
persuade  new  members  and  talk  to  them,  but  under  no  circum- 
stances to  use  any  violence,  force  or  threats.  If  anything  like  that 
occurred,  it  was  contrary  to  the  desires  of  the  League  in  its  instruc- 
tions, I  telephoned  to  the  different  districts  where  I  understood 
that  any  such  thing  was  under  way  that  that  was  not  the  proper 
thing  to  do  and  it  would  work  against  their  interest.  The  matter 
of  the  price  we  should  ask  was  under  discussion  in  the  Executive 


330 

Committee.  The  way  the  prices  were  arrived  at  was  this.  At  the 
local  meetings  in  different  localities,  the  farmers  were  asked  to  sug- 
gest what  they  thought  in  regard  to  their  cost  of  production,  etc., 
and  what  they  thought  would  be  a  living  price  for  them  and  what 
would  be  as  low  a  price  as  they  could  afford  to  sell  their  milk  at; 
the  minimum  price.  This  information  was  taken  up  at  the  general 
meeting  of  the  League.  We  had  the  reports  from  the  directors 
of  the  different  boards  and  at  this  meeting  at  which  I  was  selected, 
those  directors  came  up  with  the  prices  and  there  was  some  dis- 
cussion about  them.  The  prices  were  fixed,  at  the  last  meeting 
that  we  held  in  Albany,  previous  to  the  meeting  we  held  in  Xew 
York  sometime  in  September.  It  was  figured  out  on  the  basis 
$2.15  and  56  cents  for  100'  pounds;  that  is,  on  3  per  cent  State 
standard  basis,  -and  then  there  was  a  three  point  rise  for  each  .1 
of  butter  fat,  that  was  to  be  the  average  price  for  the  six  winter 
months.  That  was  the  only  arrangement  of  price  that  came  before 
the  board  at  the  Albany  meeting. 

"  When  it  came  to  October  1st,  the  milk  was  not  sold ;  the 
companies  had  not  agreed  and  there  was  only  one  alterna- 
tive and  that  was  to  hold  the  milk.  We  got  out  advertis- 
ing matter  and  flooded  the  country  with  literature  and  letters. 
I  got  in  touch  with  the  local  leagues.  Some  were  sent 
from  Little  Falls.  'Some  I  sent  out.  The  members  acted 
splendidly.  They  shut  right  down.  We  came  to  New  York  on 
Tuesday,  the  1st  of  October,  to  sell  this  milk.  It  was  discussed 
somewhat  that  we  could  shelter  ourselves  from  legal  attacks  by  act- 
ing under  the  name  of  a,  'State  officer  as  much  as  we  could.  The 
milk  had  been  held  up  several  days  and  the  mayor  of  the  city  of 
New  York  commenced  to  get  interested  in  the  deadlock.  We  went 
to  the  mayor's  office  and  he  asked  what  the  plan  w^as ;  he  wanted 
to  know  what  the  farmers  wanted.  We  told  him  that  we  wanted 
a  living  price  for  our  milk  which  had  been  held  up.  He  said  it 
was  creating  a  great  deal  of  disturbance  in  the  city.  "  I  would  like 
to  relieve  distress  here  and  also  help  you  people  to  bring  about  a 
settlement,"  He  undertook  to  get  in  touch  with  the  dealers.  The 
mayor  said,  however,  that  he  would  not  have  anything  to  do  with 
it  until  Swann,  the  district  attorney,  stepped  in.  He  had  some 
fear  of  the  Donnelly  Act.  Swann  said  he  would  stand  between  the 


331 

major  and  us  in  that  instance  and  then  the  major  felt  free  to  talk 
with  us.  The  fact  of  the  business  is  that  in  our  conference  with  the 
major  he  said  there  was  great  opposition  found  among  the  dealers. 
They  did  not  want  to  deal  through  Dillon  and  the  major  asked 
Dillon  if  he  would  step  aside  in  order  to  bring  about  a  settlement, 
relieve  the  want,  and  help  the  farmers.  Dillon  promised  the 
mayor  that  he  would,  but  he  never  kept  his  promise  and  kept  mak- 
ing us  all  the  trouble  he  could.  The  next  daj  Dr.  Brown  came 
over  and  said,  the  major  wished  to  see  Mr.  Brill,  Mr.  Manning, 
Mr.  Cooper  and  Mr.  Thompson.  Dillon  said  to  him,  "  Is  mj  name 
on  the  card  C  He  said,  "  Xo  jour  name  isn't  there."  Dillon  said, 
"'  Oh,  he  probably  forgot  that  and  he  wants  to  see  me  anyway  and 
I  will  go  along.'7  Dillon  went  over  and  wo  met  Dr.  Emerson  out- 
side. The  doctor  suid,  "  Mr.  Dillon  you  are  not  wanted ;  you 
stepped  out  yesterday,"  and  Dillon  went  into  one  of  those  pestifer- 
ous spells  of  his  and  jumped  around  quite  a  lot  and  said  that  there 
would  not  be'  anything  done  without  he  staying  in.  The  doctor 
said,  "  I  cannot  take  up  that ;  -that  was  my  understanding,"  and 
then  we  went  in.  When  we  came  in,  the  Mayor  said,  "  Mr.  Dillon, 
you  said  yesterday  that  you  would  step  out  so  that  we  could  get 
this  thing  settled."  Dillon  said  he  had,  but  came  back  in.  The 
Mayor  said,  "  I  am  sorry ;  under  the  circumstances  I  cannot  do 
anything  for  you."  He  turned  to  me  and  said,  "  Mr.  Brill,  I  am 
sorry.  I  thought  possibly  I  could  be  of  assistance  to  you  to  bring 
this  matter  to  a  settlement." 

"  The  milk  companies  were  ready  to  settle  on  the  price, 
but  they  did  not  want  to  have  any  dealings  with  Dillon, 
neither  did  the  Mayor,  neither  did  I.  He  was  a  nuisance 
to  everybody  connected  with  the  matter  and  has  been  ever  since. 
The  dairymen  could  and  would  have  got  better  terms  with  Dillon 
out  than  with  him  in.  'What  Dillon  wanted  was  to  advertise  himself 
and  say  to  the  dairymen,  see  what  I  did.  By  that  time  the  Bordens 
had  offered  to  pay  the  League  price  for  the  month  of  October  and 
Mr.  Woodbury,  the  Attorney-General,  thought  we  had  gained  a 
price  victory  on  that  month  and  that  we  ought  to  accept  that  price. 
I  told  Mr.  Wcodbuiy  that  I  did  not  believe  it  would  'be  fair  to  ac- 
cept the  price  for  one  month;  we  would  have  to  go  further  than 
that ;  that  we  wanted  recognition  of  the  League.  Then  I  met  Mr. 


332 

Burkitt,  editor  of  the  American  Agriculturist,  and  lie  said  that  the 
dealers  were  ready  to  accept  the  price,  but  they  did  not  wish  to  do 
business  through  Dillon,  and  wanted  to  make  an  appointment  to  see 
the  president.  He  mentioned  the  names  of  the  larger  dealers.  I 
told  them  to  come  up  to  the  Hotel  Manhattan  where  I  had  rooms 
for  that  purpose,  and  they  all  came  there  except  the  Borden  people 
finally,  the  little  independents  and  the  big  fellows,  that  is  the  way 
we  call  them.  I  saw  them  and  they  told  me  they  were  ready  and 
willing  to  buy  the  milk,  but  they  did  not  want  anything  to  do  with 
Dillon.  Mr.  Van  Bummel  was  one  of  the  spokesmen,  It  was  a 
free  discussion.  I  said,  "  I  will  call  the  Executive  Committee  to 
meet  you."  They  said,  all  right.  I  got  some  of  the  members  of  the 
Executive  Committee  and  told  them  the  companies  were  there 
ready  to  accept  our  terms.  Paul  E.  Brady  was  there  in  the  hotel. 
He  has1 150'  cows  and  is  a  member  of  the  National  Holstein-Friesian. 
Association,  the  same  as  myself.  He  is  one  of  the  directors  and  a 
neighbor  of  mine.  He  was  assisting  me.  He  is  a  good  friend  of 
mine  and  I  solicited  his  advice  and  help.  They  insisted  that  they 
would  not  make  a  contract  at  the  Hotel  Manhattan.  They  finally 
came  up.  Dillon  came  with  them.  Most  of  them  walked  out  when. 
Dillon  came  in  and  that  evening  there  they  agreed  on  the  Dairy- 
men's League  contract,  and  I  told  them  I  would  send  telegrams  re- 
leasing the  milk  that  night,  for  the  people  that  had  signed  the  con- 
tract. Of  course,  the  big  fellows  had  not  signed  and  that  made 
trouble.  They  were  all  ready  and  willing  to  sign  the  contract  that 
night  if  Dillon  had  not  come  in. 

"  The  men  dealing  with  Sheffield  Farms  and  Bordens  were 
in  a  trap.  We  were  getting  pretty  near  the  finish  and 
these  fellows  could  not  hold  out  much  longer.  I  met  Mr. 
Brady  and  told  him  the  trouble  we  were  in.  He  said,  those 
fellows  won't  sign  any  contracts,  those  big  fellows  under  any  cir- 
cumstances, but  the  arrangement  can  be  made  with  those  people  that 
they  will  recognize  the  League  and  will  pay  substantially  the  same 
price  as  the  other  people  do  and  he  said,  I  would  try  to  bring  about 
an  agreement,  so  I  had  a  memorandum  drawn  and  submitted  to 
the  Borden  people.  That  is  the  one  that  is)  marked,  Agreement 
No.  2,  October  11,  1916,  (Page  2Y9-uu)  of  this  report.  That 
provided  for  the  payment  of  League  prices  for  six  months  with  a 


333 

committee  to  adjust  three  mouths  of  it.  It  was  a  memoraudum 
but  it  was  u  ot  to  be  signed  by  either  one  of  us  because  they  posi- 
tively would  not  sign.  Their  idea  was  that  it  was  dangerous  under 
the  Donnelly  Act.  They  said,  "  Understand,  we  recognize  this 
League  and  pay  those  prices  under  this  agreement  and  deal  through 
the  president  of  the  League."  They  said,  "  We  will  send  out 
notices1  to  that  effect  to  the  stations."  They  said,  Mr.  Brill,  there 
is  your  proposition.  These  prices  were  the  same  and  the  whole 
thing  was  substantially  the  same  as  the  contract  the  independents 
had  signed,  except  that  there  was  no  signatures.  So  I  sent  out  tele- 
grams to  release  the  milk.  Immediately  from  Dillon's  office  un- 
signed telegrams  went  to  the  trade  accusing  the  president  of  treach- 
ery. That  is,  those  I  saw  had  no  signature  on  them.  They  were  sent 
to  presidents  of  the  local  leagues  and  then  the  bulletin  went  out. 
Then  we  held  up  the  milk  for  a  little  longer,  probably  cost  the 
farmers  $750,000  and  finally  accepted  the  same  thing.  The  big 
fellows  have  not  signed  and  never  would  sign.  That  was  the  whole 
result  of  Dillon's  operation  in  the  matter.  He  next  attacked  me  in 
his  paper  and  he  made  statements  in  that  paper  entirely  unfounded 
and  untrue,  as  he  usually  does,  but  I  did  not  pay  attention  to  that 
as  I  knew  we  had  won  something  for  the  farmers.  All  that  Dillon 
actually  did  was  to  put  confusion  in  the  field,  have  them  hold  back 
milk  at  a  cost  of  about  $700  ,000,  and  abuse  and  reproach  every- 
body in  sight  and  libel  them  in  his  paper.  The  Big  Four  never 
signed  the  paper  and  never  went  to  his  office,  and  finally  the  milk 
was  released  on  practically  the  same  memorandum  that  they  had 
offered  me  a  week  earlier." 


MODIFICATION    AND  REVISION    OF   THE   DAIRYMEN^   LEAGUE 

TRACT  WlTII  THE  DISTRIBUTORS  MADE  IN  DECEMBER  1916, 

Agreement  No.  1,  heretofore  set  out  in  this  report,  made  the  Ttb 
day  of  October,  1916,  signed  by  the  Dairymen's  League  of  the  one 
part  and  the  Empire  State  Dairy  Company,  and  other  distributors, 
on  the  other  part,  provided,  among  other  thing's,  as  follows  : 

"  Sixth  :  The  prices  set  forth  in  paragraph  two  hereof  for 
the  months  of  January,  February  and  March,  1917,  shall  be 
subject  to  revision  and  modification  by  an  arbitration  board 
to  be  appointed  as  hereinafter  provided  ',  upon  condition  that 


334: 

said  board  shall  decide  that  said  prices  shall  exceed  the  actual 
cost  of  production  of  said  milk  for  said  months  plus  a  reason- 
able profit  thereof.  Said  board  shall  consist  of  five  members 
who  shall  be  appointed  as  follows :  Two  members  by  each  of 
the  parties  hereto  and  the  fifth  member  by  the  said  four  mem- 
bers thus  appointed." 

Agreement  No.  3,  not  signed,  but  being  the  so  called  "  Gentle- 
men's agreement/1'  understood  to  be  followed  by  certain  milk  com- 
panies', provided:  i 

"  Dealers  are  to  announce  to  their  receiving  stations  that 
for  the  months  of  October  to  March  31st,  they  are  to  pay 
forty-five  cents  advance  over  Borden's  prices  for  the  corre- 
sponding months  of  1915  and  1916,  such  prices  to  be  firm  for 
three  months.  (October,  November  and  December.)  And  as 
to  January,  February  and  March,  19 17,  are  to  be  subject  to 
revision  and  modification  by  a  committee  which  is  to  be 
apointed ;  two  by  the  dealers,  two  by  the  producers,  and  they 
to  appoint  a  fifth,  who  are  to  consider  the  cost  of  production, 
distribution  and  market  conditions  and  arrive  at  a  price  fair 
and  equitable  to  both  parties." 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  signed  contract  expressly  provided 
that  the  prices  were  to  be  subject  to  "  revision  and  modification  '• 
upon  condition  that  said  board  shall  decide  that  said  prices  shall 
exceed  the  actual  cost  of  production  of  said  milk. 

It  is  apparent  that  the  same  idea  is  carried  into  the  so  called 
"  Gentlemen's  Agreement,"  not  signed,  but  agreed  by  parole  to  be 
adopted  by  companies  not  signing. 

Pursuant  to  this  agreement,  the  milk  distributors  selected  Messrs. 
Caldwell  and  Van  Bumel  to  represent  them  on  said  arbitration 
board,  and  the  Dairymen's  League  selected  Messrs.  Cooper  and 
Thompson  to  represent  the  League.  This  board  of  four  thereupon 
designated  Hon.  Charles  W.  Wicks,  of  Oneida  County,  as  the  fifth 
member. 

When  this  board  met  at  the  Murray  Hill  hotel,  in  the  City  of 
New  York,  on  the  last  week  of  December,  1916,  the  representatives 
of  the  distributors1  contended  that  the  contract  plainly  was  designed 
only  to  provide  for  a  modification  or  decrease  in  the  price  to  be 


335 

paid  for  milk  for  the  months  of  January,  February  and  March 
1917.  They  pointed  to  language  "  The  prices  set  forth  for  the 
months  of  January,  February  and  March,  1917,  shall  be  subject 
to  revision  and  modification  upon  condition  that  said  board  shall 
decide  that  said  prices  shall  exceed  the  actual  cost  of  production 
of  said  milk  during  said  months,  plus  a  reasonable  profit  thereof." 

This  they  asserted  gave  the  board  no  authority  to  increase  prices 
under  the  terms  of  the  Dairymen's  League  contract.  They  asserted 
that  the  only  question  before  the  board  was  whether  or  not  the 
prices  set  out  in  the  October  contract  then  exceeded  the  actual  cost, 
etc.  If  the  board  did  find  they  were  excessive  the  board  should 
modify.  If  they  did  not  find  them  to  be  excessive  they  must  stand. 

It  would  seen  that  such  is  the  usual  and  ordinary  construction 
of  the  wording  and  terms  of  Agreement  No.  1  made  between  the 
League  and  the  distributors  on  the  7th  day  of  October,  1916. 

By  December,  however,  it  was  evident  that  cost  of  production 
had  not  decreased  in  any  way,  but  had  in  fact  increased.  The 
representatives  of  the  League  took  the  position  in  the  board  that 
an  increase  of  ten  cents  per  hundred  pounds  should  be  granted  by 
the  distributors  for  the  months  of  January,  February  and  March, 
1917,  over  the  prices  provided  in  the  October  agreement. 

It  is  evident  that  the  language  of  the  agreement  of  October  7th 
presented  a  somewhat  troublesome  question.  Obviously  it  was  very 
important  that  the  Dairymen's  League  should  not  be  put  in  the 
position  of  treating  the  contract  of  October  7th  as  a  mere  "  Scrap 
of  paper."  If  the  fair  construction  of  the  contract  was  as  con- 
tended by  the  representatives  of  the  distributors,  it  was  very 
important  that  the  Dairymen's  League  should  not  be  put  in  the 
position  of  disavowing  within  three  months  the  contract  of  October 
7th  which  they  had  labored  so  long  to  bring  about.  It  was  impor- 
tant to  satisfy  the  purchasers  of  milk  that  the  League's  officers  and 
directors  were  a  responsible  body  and  that  having  made  a  contract 
in  plain  terms  it  meant  something  and  would  be  adhered  to  and 
fulfilled  by  them,  otherwise  there  could  be  no  certainty  of  success- 
ful future  dealings. 

At  the  meeting  of  the  board,  however,  controversy  was  happily 
avoided.  After  a  fair  discussion  of  the  situation  a  determina- 
tion of  the  question  was  reached  by  Messrs.  Van  Bumel, 


33G 

Caldwell,  Cooper  and  Thompson,  and  the  four  voted  unanimously 
to  increase  the  prices*  for  December,  January  and  February, 
1917,  by  five  cents  per  hundred  weight  over  the  prices  provided 
in  the  October  contract.  This  conclusion  was  reached  by  the 
four  gentlemen  without  the  necessity  of  a  deciding  vote  on  the 
part  of  the  fift!h  member  of  the  board.  This  result  avoided 
conflicts  and  recriminations  which  might  have  arisen  had 
the  distributors  been  left  in  a  position  where  they  might  have 
claimed  that  the  League  representatives  and  the  arbitrators  had 
disregarded  the  solemn  written  contract  of  October  7th.  This  solu- 
tion of  the  question  was  satisfactory  both  to  the  officers  of  the 
League  and  the  milk  distributors. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The  foregoing  we  believe  to  be  a  fair  statement  of  the  movement 
that  resulted  in  restoring  the  operations  of  the  law  of  supply  and 
demand,  to  some  extent  on  the  price  of  market  milk  to  the  pro- 
ducer in  this  territory  in  September  and  October,  191 6.  Perhaps, 
under  the  Donnelly  Act  as  interpreted  by  the  courts  of  this  State, 
the  Dairymen's  League  itself  and  its  mehtods  of  operation  were  con- 
trary to  law.  If  so  it  was  at  once  the  legal  duty  of  the  Attorney- 
General  to  apply  for  an  injunction  upon  the  affidavits  and  exhibits 
which  could  easily  have  been  secured  from  distributors.  Upon 
that  showing  as  claimed,  if  the  law  had  been  strictly  construed  and 
followed,  it  would  have  been  the  duty  of  any  judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  to  have  issued  an  order  enjoining  Brill,  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee and  everybody  connected  with  the  movement  from  further 
proceeding  therein.  But  there  would  have  been  no  practical  possi- 
bility to  have  secured  an  effective  enforcement  of  such  law. 

The  demands  of  these  dairymen  were  based  upon  necessity.  The 
general  public  and  the  buyers  and  everyone  familiar  with  the  facts 
by  that  time  conceded  the  justice  of  the  demand.  Above  all,  their 
demands  were  reasonable.  Nevertheless,  they  were  perhaps  made 
misdemeanants  and  law-breakers  by  legislation  devised  in  denance 
of  natural  laws,  impossible  of  enforcement  and  barren  of  practical 
results,  except  as  it  might  be  used  to  embarrass  and  hamper  a  just 
and  necessary  economic  development. 


337 

SITUATION  CHARGED  WITH  DANGER 

Nevertheless,  the  situation  was  charged  with  great  danger  both 
to  the  dairy  industry  and  the  people  of  this  'State.  For  nearly  ten 
days  in  New  York  City  two  men  had  with  them  credentials 
empowering  them  to  sell  and  dispose  of  say  80  per  cent  of  the 
market  milk  produced  in  the  State  of  New  York  during  the  winter 
of  19 16-1 Y.  The  buyers  delayed  action.  They  as  individuals 
feared  the  law,  which  the  dairymen  conscious  of  numbers  and 
strength  ignored.  The  increased  price  proposed  by  the  dairymen 
was  nearly  four  times  the  average  profits  of  the  previous  year.  To 
pay  this  increased  price  meant  necessarily  a  considerable  advance 
to  the  consumer,  a  step  which  they  had  learned  to  fear  to  take. 
Each  day  meant  the  loss  of  thousands  of  dollars  to  dairymen,  and 
considerable  suffering  to  the  public. 

The  situation  was  one  not  to  be  desired  and  it  is  the  plain  duty 
of  the  State  to  avoid  any  future  repetition  of  it  if  possible.  Such 
situations  are  charged  with  danger  from  many  sides. 

Assume  some  individual  had  bought  it  and  re-sold  it  at  a  hand- 
some profit.  It  only  required  courage  and  capital,  both  of  which 
are  abundant.  In  that  event  it  is  doubtful  if  we  have  any  law 
which  could  have  reached  that  individual  and  prevented  such 
action  on  his  part.  But  beyond  this,  it  might  have  T^een  possible, 
for  the  League  movement  to  have  resulted  in  failure  and  the  dairy- 
men as  before  left  at  the  mercy  of  the  organized  consumer  and  the 
prudent  business  man  engaged  in  distributing  milk,  in  which  case 
the  dairy  industry  itself  was  threatened.  These  suggestions  are 
made  with  some  diffidence,  not  as  being  ultimate  and  final  and 
positive  conclusions  that  may  be  drawn  from  the  facts  presented, 
but  as  an  attempt  to  indicate  in  some  way  the  grave  possibilities 
contained  in  the  situation  and  to  justify  the  suggestions  for 
effective  remedies  which  this  situation  seems  to  demand. 

FAILURES  OF  THE  STATE 

The  Committee  believe  that  up  to  this  time  the  State  has 
entirely  neglected  by  any  competent  officer  or  body  to  supervise, 
control  or  aid  in  a  situation  like  that  shown  to  exist.  First,  the 
State  as  a  whole  was  practically  -without  knowledge  of  the  situation 
prior  to  July,  1916. 


338 

Second,  the  State  had  failed  to  have  any  competent  body  engaged 
in  the  study  of  this  industry  and  >able  to  give  to  the  consumer  or 
distributor  satisfactory  assurances  as  to  the  cost  of  production  and 
distribution. 

Third,  the  State  had  failed  to  provide  any  adequate  machinery 
to  direct  a  movement  such  as  was  here  suddenly  precipitated  upon 
it,  or  to  give  this  great  body  of  organized  agriculturists  any  sug- 
gestion, advice  or  assistance  in  their  movement  —  that  is  demon- 
strated by  the  loss  of  the  product  both  to  producer  and  consumer 
and  the  violent  remedy  of  a  "  strike.7' 

It  is  true  that  they  had  to  some  degree  acted  under  the  name  of 
a  -State  official,  but  their  motive  in  doing  so  confessedly  was 
entirely  to  shelter  themselves  from  prosecution,  not  because  they 
expected  to  or  did  in  fact  receive  any  actual  assistance  through 
any  department. 

Fourth,  the  State  made  it  dangerous  for  the  distributors  to  meet 
the  organized  dairymen  upon  common  ground  to  discuss  and  com- 
promise or  settle  the  questions  involved.  They  were  required  by 
law  to  act  without  reference  to  one  another  in  meeting  their  com- 
mon difficulties. 

REMEDIES  SUGGESTED 

The  State  of  New  York,  first,  should  have  had  at  this  crisis,  and 
should  provide  for  itself  for  the  future,  a  competent  department 
equipped  to  thoroughly  study  and  understand  the  problems 
involved  in  advance  of  the  acute  stages  thereof.  Second,  this 
department  should  be  so  equipped  and  managed  as  to  assist  the 
co-operative  endeavors  of  the  dairymen  to  bring  about  all  the  ends 
they  sougnt  to  achieve  by  the  movement  of  October,  1916,  without 
the  attendant  danger  of  disruption  or  disaster,  loss  of  money  to 
themselves  or  suffering  to  the  public. 

Third,  this  department  should  have  been  equipped  and  author- 
ized by  law  to  sit  in  the  councils  of  the  Dairymen's  League  to  aid 
them  in  determining  the  fair  cost  of  production,  to  certify  in 
advance  to  consumers  and  distributors  that  their  demands  were  just 
and  reasonable,  to  avoid  friction,  opposition,  bitterness  and 
disaster. 

Fourth,  to  control  their  action  and  keep  it  within  the  bounds  of 
reason  and  be  enabled  to  prevent  their  product,  as  might  well  have 


339 

happened  last  year,  from  falling  into  the  hands  of  forestallers  who 
might  thereby  be  permitted  to  extort  large  sums  from  the  consumer. 

Fifth,  to  have  permitted  the  dealers  without  fear  of  the  law  to 
have  entered  into  a  common  negotiation  for  the  purchase  of  the 
necessary  quantities  of  the  product  required  by  them  in  their  legiti- 
mate business,  direct  from  the  League  without  the  intervention  of 
jobbers,  brokers  or  speculators  of  any  kind.  Thus,  in  the  judgment 
of  this  'Committee,  a  peaceful  and  just  solution  of  these  problems 
without  waste  and  loss  can  be  secured.  This  Committee  is 
endeavoring,  in  co-operation  with  other  bodies  interested  herein,  to 
prepare  and  present  to  this  session  by  an  adequate  measure  proper 
legislation  for  this  end  for  which  it  asks  the  earnest  attention  and 
support  of  the  members  of  the  Legislature  and  the  people  of  the 
State. 

EXTENSION  OF  THE  MARKET  MILK  ZONE 

The  following  statement  showing  the  extension  of  territory  from 
which  milk  is  received  in  the  metropolitan  district  was  taken  from 
the  records  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  docket  "No. 
8558.  This  statement  was  made  on  behalf  of  the  Sheffield  Farms 
Slawson-Decker  Company  and  other  milk  dealers  in  New  York 
City,  during  the  recent  hearing  before  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  in  relation  to  freight  rates  on  milk.  This  statement, 
on  behalf  of  the  company,  says  in  part : 

"Since  1895,  not  only  has  Xew  York  City  enormously  increased  in  popula- 
tion and  in  demands  for  milk  by  reason  thereof,  but  the  milk  traffic  has 
increased  proportionately  so  that  in  1915  the  volume  of  milk  received  in  the 
New  York  market,  as  shown  by  the  Milk  Reporter  (Exhibit  Xo.  1),  has 
grown  from  8,027,040  40-quart  cans  of  milk,  cream  and  condensed  milk  to 
20,065,327. 

The  general  method  of  handling  milk  by  milk  trains  furnished  by  the 
carriers  to  all  comers  without  special  privilege,  with  icing  service  as  to  L.  C. 
L.  shipments  and  without  such  service  as  to  carload  shipments,  has  continued 
with  changes  only  which  as  will  be  indicated  benefit  the  carriers,  they  carry- 
ing their  milk  trains  further  out  on  longer  hauls  as  the  demands  of  traffic 
required  and  as  the  traffic  furnished  to  the  roads  might  justify. 

Certain  changes  have  occurred  in  the  demands  of  the  city  of  milk.  Within 
recent  years,  the  main  consumption  in  New  York  City  has  been  during  the 
hot  months  of  July,  August  and  September.  This  increase  of  bulk  shipments 
during  the  summer  months  appears  by  the  returns  of  all  the  carriers  and  by 
the  testimony  of  all  dealers  who  have  been  interrogated  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  Horton,  president  of  our  company,  who  has  been  in  the  milk  business 
for  forty-three  years  in  New  York,  and  who  is  thoroughly  conversant  with  the 


340 


conditions  of  the  traffic,  says  that  fifteen  years  ago  in  the  retail  milk  business 
there  would  be  a  falling  off  of  50  per  cent,  in  the  months  of  July  and  August. 
He  says  (page  334)  that  to-day  our  greatest  sale  is  in  August,  and  that  in  the 
summer  time  the  dealer  has  to  go  the  longest  distance  for  his  supply. 

This  increase  in  distance  is  due  not  merely  to  the  increase  in  demand,  but 
to  an  extraordinary  phenomenon — the  falling  off  in  the  supply  during  the 
summer  months  in  the  nearby  zone. 

We  have  introduced  in  evidence  a  monthly  statement  for  the  entire  year 
1915  of  all  milk  received,  interstate  and  intrastate,  by  our  company  (aee 
Van  Bornel,  Exhibit  No.  1).  For  purposes  of  this  brief,  we  have  placed  here 
in  parallel  columns  our  milk  receipts  for  the  months  of  July,  August  and 
September,  in  comparison  with  the  month  of  January,  1915. 

The  figures  in  detail  appear  below: 

ANALYSIS  OF  MILK  RECEIVED  (INTERSTATE  AND  INTRASTATE)  BY  SHEFFIELD 
FARMS,  SLAWSON-DECKER  COMPANY,  IN  JANUARY,  JULY,  AUGUST  AND 
SEPTEMBER,  1915  (FROM  VAN  BOMEL,  EXHIBIT  1). 


Zones 


Jan.,  1915 


2 2,905,612 


3,218,410 
3,201,796 


July,  1915 
1,556,222 
3,948,522 

5,733,888 


Decrease 
1,349,390 


Increase 

730^112 
2,532,092 


9,325,818     11,238,632       1,349,390      3,262,204 
Jan.,  1915      Aug.,  1915       Decrease          Increase 


2 2,905,612 

3 3,218,410 

4 3,201,796 


1,401,932 
3,242,950 
4,963,266 


1,503,689 


24,540 
1,761,470 


9,325,818      9,608,148       1,503,689       1,786,010 


Jan.,  1915      Sept.,  1915       Decrease          Increase 


2 2,905,612 

3..  3,218,410 

4..  3,201,796 


1,773,449 
2,924,356 
4,436,964 


1,132,163 
294,054 


1,235,168 


9,325,818      9,134,769       1,426,217       1,235,168 


As  will  be  observed,  these  figures  show  that  in  July,  1915,  the  second  zone, 
instead  of  furnishing  us  as  much  milk  as  January,  decreased  1,349,390  quarts. 
In  comparison  with  January,  in  August  it  decreased  1,503,689  and  in  Septem- 
ber decreased  1,132,103.  In  this  same  period,  by  like  comparison  with  January 
shipments,  the  fourth  zone  increased  its  supply  2,532,092,  in  August  1,761,470, 
in  September  1,235,168. 

The  extension  of  the  far  zone  milk  supply  and  its  necessity  is,  we  think, 
sufficiently  illustrated  by  the  foregoing  figures. 

The  railroads  have  actively  aided  and  encouraged  the  development  of  milk 
traffic  in  the  far  zone,  that  is,  from  190  miles  out.  Certain  of  them  made 
contracts  with  agents,  who  entered  the  business  of  developing  milk  territory 
in  the  outlying  districts  on  the  long  haul  of  these  various  railroads,  paying 
them  commissions  of  large  percentages  on  gross  traffic  developed  (see  7  I.  C. 


341 

C.,  pages  138-142;  143-146).  They  have  also  encouraged  the  dealers  them- 
selves to  develop  this  territory,  invest  in  creameries,  educate  producers  to  the 
requirements  of  the  Board  of  Health  standards  of  New  York  City  and  develop 
railway  traffic. 

The  far  zone  business,  so  far  as  both  the  dealer  and  the  railroad  are  con- 
cerned, is  as  the  record  shows,  a  competitive  business.  Certain  elements  of 
competition  have  been  indicated  in  the  record:  First,  New  York  must  compete 
at  many  points  in  the  far  zone  with  other  cities  nearer  the  point  of  origin  of 
the  milk.  A  price  must  be  paid  by  the  dealer  and  a  rate  furnished  by  the 
carrier,  which  will  enable  this  competition  to  be  overcome,  or  the  railroad 
loses  its  long  haul  mileage  and  the  New  York  dealer  loses  his  supply.  Second, 
in  the  far  zone  the  dealer,  and  the  railroad  as  well,  must  meet  the  competi- 
tion of  butter  and  cheese  factories,  condensed  milk  plants  and  the  modern 
development  of  manufacturing  milk  powder.  Unless  a  price  can  be  paid  by 
the  New  York  dealer  higher  than  the  price  which  can  be  offered  by  butter  and 
cheese  factories,  condensed  milk  powder  plants,  this  long  distance  milk  will 
be  used  in  a  condensed  form,  involving  a  loss  of  railway  revenue  and  the  loss 
to  New  York  City  of  the  liquid  milk  necessary  for  its  supply.  Mr.  Horton 
is  specific  on  this  (pages  334  and  335;  352-3). 

Year  by  year,  New  York  City  has  to  go  further  out  into  new  territory  to 
meet  the  expanding  demand  of  her  milk  supply.  This  consideration  was  be- 
fore the  Commission  in  1895.  7  I.  C.  C.,  157.  As  shown  by  the  combined 
statistics  given  by  the  Sanitary  Milk  Dealers'  Association  and  to  which  our 
own  business  is  added  (see  Slaughter's  Exhibit  1),  50.8  per  cent,  of  the  total 
milk  received  by  all  these  New  York  dealers  in  the  month  of  March,  1916, 
taken  as  a  basis  for  the  combined  statistics,  comes  from  this  fourth  zone. 
This  milk  is  hauled  on  the  average  in  this  zone  290  miles.  It  is  received,  as 
there  shown,  from  158  separate  milk  stations  and  creameries  running  from 
190  to  457  miles  from  New  York.  From  the  second  zone,  these  dealers  re- 
ceived in  that  month  27.3  per  cent,  of  their  total  supply  from  60  stations  and 
from  the  3rd  zone  they  took  21.9  per  cent,  from  45  stations.  In  other  words, 
these  dealers  not  only  received  50  per  cent,  of  their  supply  from  the  fourth 
zone,  but  their  investments,  indicated  by  the  number  of  shipping  stations,  is 
far  greater  in  that  zone,  namely,  158  stations  out  of  the  total  of  263. 

Not  only,  as  indicated  above,  has  the  milk  traffic  increased  in  volume  by 
extending  further  out  year  by  year  for  business,  but  the  demands  of  New 
York  for  fluid  milk  indicate  that  such  extension  process  will  continue  in  the 
future  (see  Mr.  Horton's  testimony,  pages  335-6). 

Mr.  Van  Bomel,  assistant  general  manager,  illustrates,  so  far  as  our  com- 
pany's business  is  concerned,  the  nature  of  that  extension  process.  The 
average  haul  including  all  zones  for  our  interstate  milk  is  now  232.7  miles 
(page  407).  This  is  for  March  and  the  August  haul  would  be  far  longer. 
At  page  408  he  illustrates  the  speed  of  this  expansion  movement  as  applied 
to  our  own  business.  He  has  been  with  our  company  eight  years.  One  of  his 
first  duties  eight  years  ago  was  to  build  an  important  plant  at  Vergennea, 
Vt.  (page  410).  Vergennes  is  283  miles  from  New  York  City.  Since  that 
time,  eight  years  ago,  we  have  extended  from  Vergennes  to  Franklinville,  now 
our  furthest  point,  which,  as  shown  on  the  Slaughter  Exhibit  1,  is  457  miles 
from  the  New  York  terminus.  It  is  some  fifty  or  sixty  miles  from  Buffalo. 


342 

We  have  another  plant  at  Lisbon,  454  miles  from  the  eastern  terminus  at 
New  York,  and  is  some  twelve  or  fourteen  miles  from  Ogdensburg  (page  410). 

Mr.  Horton  says  that  not  only  have  these  changes  occurred  since  1895,  but 
certain  others,  which  have  a  bearing  upon  the  New  York  milk  problem.  Free 
passes  were  formerly  had  and  they  were  abolished  by  the  Commission  in  the 
1895  decision.  The  annual  cost  for  the  transportation,  formerly  free,  which 
our  company  now  pays,  is  between  five  and  six  thousand  dollars  (page  372). 
Another  and  more  important  change  is  this:  In  1895  shipping  stations  were 
to  a  considerable  extent  supplied  by  the  railroads  through  milk  agents  acting 
under  percentage  of  produced  traffic  contracts  and  who  leased  these  shipping 
stations  to  milk  dealers  at  from  one  dollar  a  year  to  twenty-five  dollar*  a 
month,  which  was  the  highest  price  in  his  experience  for  such  leases  under  old 
conditions  (page  345).  To-day  the  dealer  usually  builds  his  own  creameries 
(pages  346  and  347)  at  a  cost  varying  from  $8,000  to  $90,000.  The  demands 
of  the  health  authorities  for  increased  sanitary  requirement  have  made  these 
increased  expenses  necessary,  both  as  to  plants  and  other  equipment  (page 
336).  The  expense  of  creamery  construction  amounts,  as  Mr.  Horton's  ex- 
perience goes,  to  approximately  $100  for  every  can  of  milk  received,  that  K 
the  creamery  which  will  produce  200  cans  of  milk  a  day  will  be  one  which 
will  cost  us  $20,000  for  the  plant  necessary  to  handle  it  (pages  348  and  349). 
In  the  fourth  zone  alone  this  single  company  has  (page  350)  an  investment 
for  its  35  stations  alone  of  $499,000,  of  which  $347,000  is  for  plants  from 
which  we  receive  interstate  shipments.  If  the  average  cost  of  our  stations 
in  the  fourth  zone  is  applied  to  the  other  dealers,  who  with  us  have  158  milk 
shipping  plants  in  that  zone,  the  amount  of  that  investment  made  by  dealers 
is  obviously  very  large.  So  far  as  our  company  is  concerned  not  only  have 
these  creameries  been  built  in  this  zone,  but  substantially  all  of  them  have 
been  built  or  reconstructed  within  the  past  ten  years  (pages  335-6). 

In  other  words,  developing  their  business  on  the  basis  of  existing  zone  rates 
in  the  far  zone,  the  dealers  have  produced  the  milk  traffic  to  New  York  by 
educating  the  farmers  so  that  they  will  comply  with  the  health  standards  of 
New  York  City  and  by  paying  them  a  rate  sufficient,  both  for  the  interest  of 
the  dealer  and  the  carrier,  to  offset  the  competition  of  the  butter  and  cheese 
factories  and  other  condensers  of  milk  and  to  overcome  the  competition  of 
nearby  cities  (pages  334-6;  351,  2  and  3). 

POINT  I. 
THE  CRUX  OF  THE  WHOLE  MATTER  OF  MILK  RATES  IN  AND  TO  NEW  YORK 

is  THE  RATE  500  MILES  AND  OVER  FROM  NEW  YORK 

Our  company  is  in  favor  of  the  continuation  of  the  present  zones.  If,  how- 
ever, the  Commission  should  determine  that  the  zone  system  adopted  by  the 
Commission  itself  in  1897  is  for  any  reason  no  longer  adaptable  to  present 
conditions  and  that  some  other  system  for  scaling  rates  should  be  adopted,  we 
deem  it  our  duty  to  present  to  the  Commission  as  forcefully  as  we  are  able  the 
facts  and  considerations  which  make  it  essential  that  whatever  other  changes 
may  be  made,  the  rate  500  mil^s  from  New  York  should  not  be  changed;  that 
if  there  be  a  closing  of  the  now  open  far  zone,  it  should  be  a  point  in  mileage 
not  less  than  500  miles  from  the  city  terminal;  that  if  a  scaling  basis  of  any 
kind  be  adopted,  the  scale  must  be  a  rate  by  which  at  a  point  not  less  than 


343 

500  miles  from  Xew  York  the  present  rate  as  a  maximum  rate  be  reached. 
It  may  be  said  that  there  is  no  logic  in  an  open  zone,  beginning  190  miles 
from  Xew  York  and  having  no  definite  outer  limit.  This,  \ve  think,  overlooks 
certain  important  practical  considerations.  First,  the  history  of  New  York 
milk  rates  under  which  the  traffic  has  developed  for  over  forty  years.  As  has 
been  indicated,  the  railroads  themselves  originally  adopted  a  flat  rate  for 
any  distance,  which  was  in  force  until  1895;  second,  the  zone  system  adopted 
in  1897  adapted  itself  to  the  wishes  of  the  carriers  in  leaving  the  so-called 
fourth  zone  an  open  one,  the  philosophy  of  the  railroads'  position  being  well 
expressed  in  the  answer  of  the  Xew  York,  Lake  Erie  &  Western  R.  R.,  as 
shown  at  page  99  of  the  Milk  Producers'  case,  7  I.  C.  C.,  pages  99  and  100, 
and  which  philosophy  was  only  partially  limited  by  the  zone  system  adopted 
at  that  time.  Third,  there  are  practical  limits  to  the  open  zone,  though  not 
expressed  in  exact  figures  in  terms  of  miles.  It  means  that  its  outer  ex- 
tremity is  the  run  of  the  milk  train.  Where  there  is  not  enough  traffic,  there 
will  be  no  milk  train  service.  The  extension  of  the  fourth  zone  has  been  a 
natural  process  of  extending  further  and  further  the  run  of  the  milk  train 
as  business  has  been  developed  or  is  immediately  in  prospect  sufficient  to 
justify  milk  train  service.  See  testimony  of  Mr.  Van  Bomel  (pages  417  and 
418),  as  illustrating  the  practical  way  in  which  milk  train  service  has  de- 
veloped. He  says: 

(  There  are  two  practical  limitations  to  the  open  zone.  First,  the  absence 
of  a  tariff  specifying  a  particular  individual  station  as  a  shipping  point 
and  the  second  is,  unless  the  milk  train  goes  through  there  they  can  offer 
you  no  service;  therefore,  cannot  accept  your  shipment  other  than  as 
freight.' 

Tie  illustrates  this  (page  419). 

There  is  another  practical  limitation  to  the  open  /.one  as  given  by  Mr.  Kail- 
man  of  the  Xew  York  Central.  It  is  the  distance  through  which  milk  can  be 
brought  within  sixteen  hours  to  Xew  York  City  in  such  condition  as  will  meet 
the  requirements  of  public  health. 

We  do  not  say  that  any  change  of  the  zone  system  would  result  in  chaos. 
It  might  result  in  confusion.  We  do  not  say  that  any  change  which  at  a 
point  500  miles  from  Xew  York  increases  the  present  rate  paid  by  shippers 
will  be  objectionable  from  a  rate  standpoint  and  will  be  exceedingly  damaging 
to  the  interest  not  only  of  the  producer  and  dealer,  but  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  consumer  in  Xew  York  to  whom  this  absolute  necessity  of  life  must 
come. 

It  is  desirable  to  group  these  considerations  and  present  them  as  forcefully 
as  we  can  as  the  main  point  which  we  make  in  our  brief. 

The  rate  for  the  fourth  zone,  which  now  handles  milk  for  us  at  points  450 
miles  from  Xew  York  is  a  rate  fixed  by  the  carriers,  acquiesced  in  by  the 
commission  in  1897  and  under  which  we  have  made  our  large  investments. 

As  the  Commission  says  in  the  Beatrice  case,  Beatrice  Creamery  Co.  vs. 
111.  Central  R.  R.,  15  I.  C.  C.,.  109: 

'  This  Commission  has  several  times  held  that  where  a  particular  in- 
dustry has  grown  up  under  rates  voluntarily  established  and  maintained 
by  carriers,  those  rates  cannot  be  advanced  without  considering  the  effect 
upon  that  industry.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  a  contract  between  the 
railroad  and  the  shipper.  That  a  certain  rate  should  be  charged  by  a  rail- 


344 

road  is  a  matter  of  public  concern.  It  cannot  ordinarily  be  made  the 
subject  of  private  contract,  but  in  determining  what  is  the  just  and  reas- 
onable thing  to  be  done,  this  Commission  must  consider  the  effect  upon  all 
the  parties.* 

Citing 

Banner  Milling  Co.  vs.  New  York  Central,  14  I.  C.  C.  398. 

Western  Oregon  Lumber  Mfrs.  Assn.  vs.  S.  P.  R.  Co.,  14  I.  C.  C.,  61; 

see  also 
Waukeska  Limestone  Co.  vs.  C.  N.  &  St.  Pa.,  26  I.   C.  C.,   515,   at 

page  519. 

The  carriers  doubtless  felt  that  the  open  zone  system  was  the  better  way 
to  create  traffic  and  for  the  economical  handling  of  this  necessity  of  life  as  an 
article  of  transportation.  That  the  carriers  in  adopting  this  rate  and  in  the 
further  extension  of  the  zone  have  found  this  rate  to  be  profitable  at  the 
present  point  of  furthest  service,  now  approximating  500  miles,  from  the  ter- 
minal, is  indicated  by  their  own  conduct,  in  voluntarily  extending  as  traffic 
increased  the  run  of  the  milk  trains  and,  in  employing  agents  to  go  out  into 
far  distance  territory  and  develop  long  distance  milk  traffic.  It  is  not  to  be 
assumed  lightly  that  the  contracts  made  with  Westcott  and  with  Millett  and 
the  Produce  Dispatch  were  contracts  made  to  develop  a  traffic  which  would  be 
non-productive  in  net  revenue.  While,  to  be  sure,  many  of  these  contracts 
discussed  in  the  Milk  Producers'  Protective  Association  case  (see  pages  138-142; 
143-146)  for  development  of  the  far  zone  milk  by  milk  agents  for  the  railroad 
have  lapsed,  the  business  having  been  created  and  having  acquired  its  own 
momentum,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  so  late  as  1908,  the  New  York  Central  being 
then  in  control  of  the  Rutland  Railroad,  by  holding  51  per  cent,  of  its  stock, 
renewed  a  contract  between  the  Rutland  Railroad  and  the  Produce  Dispatch 
to  pay  I2y2  per  cent,  on  the  gross  earnings  of  the  milk  traffic  on  the  long 
distance  territory  in  Vermont  and  northern  New  York  operated  by  that  road. 
We  are  bringing  milk  to  New  York  from  Lisbon,  N.  Y.,  on  the  Rutland  (454 
miles ) .  If  the  present  rate  on  the  500  mile  haul  does  not  represent  a  profit, 
it  is  difficult  to  conceive  why  the  Pennsylvania  Railway  should  now  be  de- 
veloping its  milk  traffic  for  the  New  York  territory  by  fair  carload  lot  ar- 
rangements as  to  pickup  service  (page  399,  and  following),  including  ferri- 
age (see  page  428),  covering  distances,  so  far  as  our  company  alone  is  con- 
cerned, of  from  323  to  457  miles  (see  Slaughter  Exhibit  No.  1),  the  Pennsyl- 
vania stations  indicated  being  between  Grover,  Penn.,  323  miles,  and  Franklin- 
ville,  New  York,  457  miles. 

As  indicated  by  the  Slaughter  Exhibit  No.  1,  the  dealers  whose  statistics 
are  there  combined  received  50.8  per  cent,  of  their  total  milk  from  this  far 
zone  and  on  an  average  haul  in  this  zone  of  290  miles  in  March,  which  aver- 
age haul  will  be  greatly  extended  in  August,  the  season  of  greatest  demand. 

Now,  the  dealer  in  this  fourth  zone  has  to  meet  the  competition  which  has 
been  indicated  to  get  liquid  milk  for  New  York.  The  dealers  have  gone  into 
this  territory,  these  long  distances,  not  because  they  prefer  to  pay  tire  higher 
rate  in  this  zone  for  milk,  but  because  of  necessity. 

The  facts  showing  the  extraordinary  falling  off  of  milk  supply  for  New 
York  in  the  nearby  zone  during  the  hot  weather  of  July,  August  and  Sep- 
tember, the  time  of  the  city's  greatest  need,  has  been  already  indicated  in 
the  statement  of  facts  and  in  the  record.  Mr.  Horton  has  given  his  views  as 


345 

to  the  cause  (see  pages  334  and  335).  There  are  doubtless  additional  causes, 
such  as,  for  example,  summer  hotels  and  boarding  places  in  country  localities 
within  the  second  zone. 

Whatever  the  causes,  the  facts  remain.  Our  figures  show  as  indicated  that 
in  July,  1915,  the  second  zone,  instead  of  furnishing  us  with  as  much  milk 
as  in  January,  decreased  1,349,390  quarts,  decreased  in  August  1,503,689 
quarts  and  in  September  1,132,163  quarts,  all  in  comparison  with  January 
shipments.  In  that  same  period  the  fourth  zone  milk  increased  over  its  Janu- 
ary supply  in  July  2,532,092  quarts,  in  August  1,761,470  quarts,  and  in  Sep- 
tember 1,235,168  quarts.  In  other  words,  but  for  the  milk  we  get  on  the 
long  haul  in  the  critical  period  of  the  year  for  a  sweltering  city  (mis-called 
a  summer  resort),  we  should  have  a  milk  famine  every  year. 

We  earnestly  request  this  Commission  to  study  this  circumstance  and  the 
implications  of  these  figures.  There  are,  we  submit,  certain  self-evident  truths 
whch  this  problem  presents. 

First,  Xew  York  absolutely  needs  every  drop  of  this  fourth  zone  milk;  sec- 
ond, it  is  going  to  need  more  of  it  as  the  years  go  by.  It  has  to  reach  out  for 
it  further  and  further;  third,  this  milk  can  be  had  only  under  competitive 
conditions;  fourth,  the  railway  rate  now  in  force,  under  which  dealers  have 
made  their  investments  in  countless  plants  in  the  fourth  zone  and  under 
which  those  conditions  are  met  is  one  adopted  by  the  railroads  themselves, 
and  a  disturbance  of  the  rate  at  this  crucial  point  by  the  adoption  of  a  scale 
which  at  a  distance  of  500  miles  increases  this  rate  in  any  degree  will  in  effect 
limit  New  York's  milk  supply  to  her  enormous  injury  at  the  time  of  her 
greatest  need. 

We  are  convinced  that  the  method  of  handling  the  milk  problem  of  New 
York,  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  1897,  was  eminently  wise.  In  this  terri- 
tory, no  scale,  graduated  by  miles,  has  ever  been  in  force.  If  such  a  scale 
had  been  adopted  in  1897,  in  view  of  the  added  mileage,  which  year  by  year 
has  been  required  to  meet  the  city's  need  for  milk,  a  serious  and  heavy  burden 
would  have  been  laid  upon  the  city  consumers  without  justification.  It  is  but 
the  application  of  an  axiom  of  economics  to  say  that  the  price  of  milk  in  New 
York  City  will  be  the  price  of  the  most  expensive  part  of  the  product  neces- 
sary for  the  city's  consumption.  No  shipper  will  build  a  creamery  at  a  point 
from  which  he  cannot  bring  milk  to  the  market  at  a  profit.  The  price  paid  by 
the  city  consumer  must  be  such  as  to  produce  a  profit  to  the  shipper  and 
producer  at  every  point  from  Avhich  milk  must  necessarily  be  produced  for 
the  market. 

If  the  Commission  in  1897  had  disregarded  the  existing  conditions,  the  fact 
that  New  York  City  must  receive  her  milk  only  from  the  north  and  west, 
nothing  from  the  south  or  east,  had  disregarded  the  fact  that  no  graduated 
scale  had  ever  been  in  force,  the  fact,  as  the  record  shows,  that  even  there 
was  in  process  a  continuous  extension  of  railroad  haul  (see  7  I.  C.  C.,  at 
page  111),  and  had  fixed  a  graduated  scale,  the  graduation  increasing  in  the 
long  haul,  it  would  have  circumscribed  the  city's  milk  area  and  increase  the 
cost  of  a  necessity  of  life  to  the  consumer. 

The  producer  doubtless  has  rights  which  must  be  considered  and  some  com- 
plaints have  besn  made  by  producers,  as  shown  by  the  record.  From  the  pro- 
ducers' standpoint,  the  1897  situation  repeats  itself.  The  nearby  producer 
complains  that  he  is  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  his  locality  by  existing  zone 


34G 

Arrangements  and  more  especially  by  the  long  haul,  from  190  miles  to  ap- 
proximity  500  miles,  now  in  practice.  The  method  of  relief  afforded  by  the 
Commission  in  1897  is  equally  applicable  now,  namely,  a  finding  that  the  rato 
adopted  by  the  carriers  in  the  far  zone  for  the  present  long  haul  of  approxi- 
mately 500  miles  is  reasonable  and  a  subdivision  of  the  nearer  zones  by  a 
reduction  of  rates.  It  is  our  opinion,  however,  that  the  so-called  benefit  of 
locality,  claim  of  the  nearby  producer,  is  a  negligible  consideration  in  dealing 
with  the  great  problem  of  supplying  the  largest  city  in  the  world  with  the 
milk  necessary  for  its  life." 

This  statement  on  behalf  of  the  milk  distributors  to  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  showing  the  growth  and  development 
of  the  traffic  is  reported  herein  by  this  Committee  not  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  the  conclusions  of  this  statement  the  conclusions 
of  the  Committee,  but  because  it  is  a  statement  of  certain  phases 
of  the  question  which  the  dairyman  seldom  encounters  and  it  is 
thought  that  these  views  as  presented  in  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  case  will  be  of  much  interest  to  the  Legislature  and 
to  the  people  throughout  the  State. 

THE  MILK  TRAINS 

In  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  hearing  last  referred 
to,  the  carriers  made  the  following  statement  as  showing  the  extent 
and  character  of  the  service  furnished  by  them  to  the  milk  traffic. 
The  Committee  includes  this  statement  in  this  report  as  showing 
probably  as  complete  a  record  of  the  milk  train  routes  as  can  be 
well  gotten  together.  It  illustrates  the  tremendous  volume  of  this 

traffic  ; 

IT.  CHANGED  CONDITIONS  SINCE  1897 
(a)  GENERAL  TERRITORY  SERVED  IN  1897  AND  TO-DAY 

In  1897  the  section  of  country  north  and  westerly  of  New  York  City,  com- 
prising Sussex  and  other  counties  in  northern  New  Jersey,  Orange  county, 
N.  Y.,  and  contiguous  portions  of  Ulster  and  Sullivan  counties  in  NGAV  York, 
together  with  Long  Island,  N.  Y.,  the  southeasterly  section  of  New  York 
State  east  of  the  Hudson  River,  and  some  adjoining  parts  of  western  Con- 
necticut and  Massachusetts  constituted  the  nearby  milk  producing  region  frorai 
Avhich  a  large  part  of  New  York's  milk  supply  was  shipped.  Milk  and  cream 
were  also  forwarded  from  more  distant  localities  in  the  States  of  New  York, 
Pennsylvania  and  Massachusets  (1897  Opinion,  p.  104). 

Since  then  the  milk  producing  territory  has  extended  until  today  milk  isi 
brought  to  New  York  City  from  the  western  and  northern-most  parts  of  New 
York  State,  from  Pennsylvania,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut  and  Vermont 
(Carriers'  exhibits).  The  greatest  development  of  the  milk  traffic  to 


York  is  that  on  the  Rutland  Railroad  in  Vermont  and  northern  New  York 


3-17 

(p.  076).  On  the  other  hand  the  production  of  milk  in  the  nearby  territory 
has  greatly  decreased  so  that  today  practically  no  milk  is  shipped  to  New 
York  from  territory  within  40  miles  of  the  New  York  and  New  Jersey  ter- 
minals (p.  333).  From  the  territory  served  by  the  Harlem  and  Putnam  divi- 
sions of  the  New  York  Central  the  milk  and  cream  tonnage  has  diminished 
by  more  than  one-half  (p.  673),  and  no  milk  is  now  shipped  from  points  along; 
the  east  side  of  the  Hudson  River  (p.  687). 

(b)   INCREASE  SINCE  1897  IN  THE  DISTANCE  FROM  WHICH  MILK  is  BROUGHT 

TO  NEW  YORK 

In   1897  the  longest  haul  of  milk  on  the  Lehigh  Valley  railroad  was  335 
miles.     At  the  present  time  the  longest  interstate  haul  is  from  Camden,  N.  Y., 
400.1  miles   (p.  892).     In  1897  the  most  distant  milk  shipping  station  of  the 
Ontario  and  Western  was  Kenwood,  N.  Y.,  264  miles  from  the  terminal.     To- 
day the  most  distant   station   is  Oswego,  N.   Y.,  325  mites    (p.   1009).     Tho 
most  distant  shipping  station  on  the  Erie  Railroad  was,  in   1897,  Hornells 
ville,  N.  Y.,  331  miles  from  Jersey  City,  and  55  per  cent    of  the  traffic  origi- 
nated at  main  line  points  and  branches  of  the  Erie  in  Orange  county,  east  of 
Port  Jervis,  N.  Y.,  which  is  87  miles  from  New  York  City.     Today  the  Eric 
brings  milk  and  cream  to  Jersey  City  from  South  Dayton,  N.  Y.,  448  miles  dis- 
tant (Wheeler  Exhibit  No.  1,  p.  1084).    In  1897  no  milk  was  shipped  over  the 
West  Shore  from  points  beyond  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  290  miles  from  New  York. 
Today  milk  is  shipped  from  Earlville,  339  miles  distant    (pp.  659,  675).     In 
1897  there  was  no  milk  traffic  on  the  New  York  Central  west  of  Albany,  142: 
miles  distant.     At  the  present  time  milk  is  shipped  from  Massena  Springs, 
N.  Y.,  390  miles  from  Now  York,  the  farthermost  northeastern  terminus  of  the 
New  York  Central  in  New  York  State  ( p.  676 ) .     The  most  distant  point  from 
which  milk  is  shipped  into  New  York  over  the  Rutland  and  the  New  York 
Central  is  Lisbon,  N.  Y.,  451  miles  away   (pp.  659,  676).     The  milk  shipping 
territory  of  the  Ulster  &  Delaware  has  not  changed  since  1897    (pp.  788,  789). 
In  1897  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  carried  no  milk  to  New  Y^ork.     The  initial 
shipment  was  March  1,  1913   (p.  1482).     To-day  special  milk  trains  carrying 
milk  to  New  York  and  Philadelphia  are  operated  daily   (p.  1482)   from  East 
Aurora,  N.  Y.,  491  miles  distant,  Horseheads,  N.  Y.,  373  miles,  with  connec- 
tions by  regular  freight  or  passenger  trains  carrying  milk  cars  (p.  1473)  from 
Lovell,  Pa.,  503  miles,  and  from  Tuscarora,  N.  Y.,  499  miles,  with  service  from 
various   intermediate   points    (Pennsylvania   Railroad    Exhibit   No.    1    (map), 
Witness  Nathans,  April  25,  1916,  .p.  1472) 

The  maximum  distance  from  which  Borden  &  Company  ships  into  New  York 
today  is  451  miles  (p.  270).  In  March,  1916,  Lisbon,  454  miles  from  New 
York,  was  the  most  distant  point  from  which  the  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson- 
Decker  Co.  shipped.  Since  that  time  shipments  have  been  made  from  Lovell, 
which  is  considerably  farther  (p.  410).  In  1895  that  company  made  no  ship- 
ments from  points  more  than  108  miles  from  New  York  (p.  332). 

(c)     REASONS  FOR  THE  CHANGED  CONDITIONS 

The  extension  of  the  territory  from  which  the  milk  supply  of  New  York 
City  is  drawn  has  been  brought  about  by  the  extension  of  the  commuting  ter- 
ritory, hastened  by  the  improved  train  facilities,  into  what  was  formerly  milk 
producing  territory,  and  in  the  Harlem  Valley  by  the  acquisition  by  the 


348 

c-ity  of  a  large  area  in  connection  with  the  city  water  supply  (pp.  212,  332, 
333,  673,  674).  Furthermore,  there  has  been  a  tremendous  increase  in  the 
amount  of  milk  demanded  by  the  New  York  market  (p.  212,  Milk  Reporter, 
Exhibit  No.  1).  In  addition  to  the  New  York  city  requirements  there  has 
developed  a  demand  from  summer  resorts  along  the  Long  Island  and  New 
Jersey  coasts  and  cities  adjacent  to  New  York  (pp.  334,  411). 

The  development  in  the  traffic  from  points  on  the  Rutland  R.  R.  in  Ver- 
mont and  Northern  New  York  is  the  result  of  a  contract  between  the  Rutland 
and  the  New  York  Central  and  one  Stephen  C.  Millett,  which  expires  in  1919, 
under  which  Mr.  Millett  undertook  to  educate  the  farmers  along  the  Rutland 
to  the  requirements  of  the  New  York  City  Board  of  Health,  stimulate  milk 
production,  erect  creameries  at  Ms  expense  and  lease  them  to  shippers,  super- 
vise the  loading  of  the  milk,  the  icing  of  it  at  his  expense,  the  delivery  of  it, 
the  handling  of  claims,  and  to  solicit  the  traffic.  The  services  furnished 
under  this  contract  are  in  lieu  of  similar  services  and  facilities  furnished  by 
other  carriers  themselves.  In  return  for  these  services  Mr.  Millett  eceives  12^5 
per  cent,  of  the  New  York  Central's  proportion  of  the  revenue  from  the 
traffic  induced  by  him,  and  15  per  cent,  of  the  Rutland's  proportion.  Under 
this  contract  the  milk  traffic  on  the  Rutland  has  developed  from  zero  in  1898 
to  eleven  cars  a  day  at  the  present  time  (pp.  704-706).  Most  of  the  cream- 
eries have  now  been  sold  to  shippers  (p.  344). 

III.       SERVICE     RENDERED     BY     THE     VARIOUS     CARRIERS     WITH 

REFERENCE  TO  THE  MILK  TRAFFIC 

(a)     THE  DELAWARE,  LACKAWANNA  &  WESTERN  RAILWAY  COMPANY 
1.       Train  Service 

Three  regular  milk  trains  are  operated  daily  to  carry  the  milk  from  the 
originating  points  to  Binghamton,  New  York,  where  it  is  all  consolidated  into 
through  trains  for  movement  to  Hoboken.  One  of  these  trains  starts  from 
Utica  at  9:15  A.  M.  and  runs  through  to  Binghamton,  a  distance  of  95  miles, 
arriving  there  at  1:45  P.  M.  It  consists  of  from  seven  to  eight  cars.  Another 
train  leaves  Richfield  Springs  at  9:25  A.  M.  and  reaches  Binghamton,  103 
miles  distant,  at  2:15  P.  M.  It  consists  of  from  twelve  to  thirteen  cars.  Both 
of  these  trains  are  made  up  exclusively  of  milk  cars. 

A  third  train  leaves  Syracuse  at  8:55  A.  M.  and  arrives  at  Binghamton,  80 
miles  distant,  at  1:40  P.  M.  with  from  fifteeen  to  sixteen  cars  of  milk.  It 
picks  up  a  car  of  milk  at  Cortland  from  the  Cortland  County  Traction  Com- 
pany, an  electric  railway,  and  one  or  two  cars  originating  on  the  Cincinnatus 
Branch  of  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western  Railroad,  and  also  carries 
one  passenger  coach. 

In  addition  to  these  regular  milk  trains  a  passenger  train,  No.  906,  brings 
one  or  two  cars  daily  from  points  north  of  Syracuse  which  are  cut  out  at 
Chenango  Forks,  a  short  distance  north  of  Binghamton,  and  after  being  iced 
there  are  picked  up  and  taken  to  Binghamton,  by  the  regular  milk  train  from 
Richfield  Springs.  And  finally  a  passenger  train  leaving  Elmira  at  8:30  A.  M. 
carries  two  cars  of  milk  (one  of  which  originates  on  the  Ithaca  Branch  of 
the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western  Railroad)  to  Binghamton  (pp.  830-32). 

All  of  the  milk'  brought  into  Binghamton  by  the  trains  above  referred  to 
is  consolidated  and  forwarded  to  Hoboken  in  the  following  trains: 


349 

The  three  trains  originating  at  Utica,  Richfield  Springs  and  Syracuse,  re- 
spectively, are  consolidated  into  two  solid  milk  trains  consisting  of  from 
eighteen  to  nineteen  cars  each,  which  are  run  through  to  Hoboken,  a  distance 
of  206  miles,  without  stopping  except  to  load  at  one  station,  pick  up  a  car 
at  another,  and  to  unload  two  small  consignments.  They  leave  Binghamton 
at  2:35  P.  M.  and  2:40  P.  M.  and  arrive  at  Hoboken  at  10:27  and  10:32  P.  M. 
respectively. 

The  two  cars  of  milk  brought  to  Binghamton  by  the  passenger  train  from 
Elmira  are  hauled  in  a  milk  train  leaving  Binghamton  at  11:30  A.  M.  and 
arriving  at  Hoboken  9:33  P.  M.  This  train  might  be  called  a  local  milk 
train  as  distinguished  from  the  two  express  trains  above  mentioned.  It  picks 
up  all  of  the  milk  east  of  Binghamton  originating  in  Pennsylvania  and  New 
Jersey  except  a  small  amount  originating  on  the  Sussex  Branch  of  the  Dela- 
ware, Lackawanna  &  Western  Railroad.  It  arrives  at  Hoboken  with  from 
fifteen  to  sixteen  cars  of  milk  (Record,  pp.  831-32). 

Three  cars  of  milk  originating  on  the  Sussex  Branch  of  the  Delaware, 
Lackawanna  &  Western  Railroad  in  New  Jersey  are  daily  carried  in  a  local 
passenger  train  to  Hoboken,  an  average  distance  of  60  miles.  Five  other  cars 
of  milk  originating  on  this  branch  was  taken  to  Port  Morris,  where  they  are 
picked  up  by  the  local  milk  train  from  Binghamton. 

A  mixed  train  of  three  milk  cars  and  one  or  two  passenger  cars  leaves 
Groveland,  New  York,  at  6:40  A.  M.  daily  and  arrives  at  Buffalo  at  9:40  A.  M. 
It  is  run  primarily  for  the  milk  traffic  (pp.  832,  852). 

The  trains  above  described  are  run  with  the  very  best  motive  power  and 
maintain  their  schedules  with  the  same  degree  of  regularity  as  the  Railroad 
Company's  best  passenger  trains.  The  service  is  an  express  service  fairly  com- 
parable with  the  Railroad  Company's  passenger  and  express  service,  par- 
ticularly in  the  case  of  through  trains  from  Binghamton  to  Hoboken  without 
stop  except  as  above  noted.  And  the  return  movement  of  the  cars  loaded 
with  the  empty  containers  is  made  with  the  same  speed  and  regularity  —  a 
service  which  the  shippers  demand  and  have  to  have  as  their  business  is  con- 
ducted (pp.  834-35.  854). 

2.     Equipment 

The  motive  power  is  of  the  best  that  the  Railroad  Company  possesses.  The 
engine  that  hauls  one  of  the  through  trains  from  Binghamton  on  arrival  at 
Hoboken  is  sent  to  the  roundhouse,  cleaned  and  oiled,  filled  with  coal  and 
water,  and  goes  back  on  the  Railroad  Company's  fast  mail  train  at  2:15  in 
the  morning.  That  represents  the  class  of  motive  equipment  used  on  the  milk 
trains. 

The  cars  are  refrigerator  cars,  thoroughly  insulated  and  with  ice  bunkera 
in  each  corner,  having  an  average  total  capacity  of  three  tons.  They  were 
built  expressly  for  the  transportation  of  milk  and  are  used  exclusively  for  that 
service.  From  the  floor  down  they  are  the  same  in  every  paricular  as  a  first- 
olass  passenger  coach.  The  Railroad  Company  has  147  of  these  cars  in  service 
at  the  present  time  (pp.  834-35,  854). 

3.       Services  and  Facilities  at  Point  of  Shipment 

Each  milk  train  starts  from  its  initial  point  with  a  crew  of  four  trainmen 
and  a  milk  messenger.  The  train  crew  loads  all  less-than-carload  shipments, 
being  usually  assisted  by  the  creamery  employees,  except  at  stations  where 


350 

a  milk  car  is  left,  in  which  case  the  car  is  loaded  by  the  consignor  and  made 
ready  to  be  picked  up  when  the  train  comes  along,  the  same  as  is  done  in  the 
case  of  carload  shipments.  The  carload  shipments  are  loaded  by  the  con- 
signors (p.  833). 

The  Railroad  Company  provides  loading  platforms  at  its  own  expense  at  all 
points  of  shipment  where  they  are  needed.  The  standard  platform  is  about 
30  feet  long,  usually  enclosed  and  roofed  over,  and  in  most  cases  there  is 
a  runway  to  the  platform  from  the  creamery.  It  is  maintained  at  the  Railroad 
Company's  expense  (pp.  833,  863). 

4.     Terminal  Facilities 

The  facilities  of  the  Railroad  Company  for  unloading  at  Hoboken  consist 
of  two  platforms  specially  constructed  for  the  handling  of  milk  traffic.  The 
main  platform  is  covered  and  is  from  1,200  to  1,500  feet  long.  The  approach 
to  the  platform  consists  of  a  50-foot  driveway  paved  with  Belgian  blocks. 
The  second  platform  is  about  250  feet  long.  Each  platform  has  a  track  imme- 
diately adjacent  to  it  and  a  second  track  on  the  outside  so  that  cars  can  be 
coupled  if  necessary  (pp.  835,  856). 

The  trains  are  broken  up  after  arrival  at  Hoboken  Terminal  and  the  cars 
destined  to  Hoboken  are  drilled  by  a  switch  engine  to  the  milk  platforms. 
The  cars  destined  to  Newark  and  Montclair  are  made  up  into  a  special  train 
of  milk  cars  and  forwarded  to  those  points.  On  arrival  of  the  train  at  Newark 
the  cars  destined  to  Broad  street  station  are  set  out  and  a  drill  engine 
places  them  while  the  road  engine  goes  on  to  Montclair.  On  the  reverse  move- 
ment this  has  to  be  done  also.  All  this,  of  course,  involves  a  very  consider- 
able switching  service  (pp.  833,  835,  866). 

The  less-than-carload  shipments  are  unloaded  by  the  Milk  Department  em- 
ployees and  delivered  to  the  consignees  on  the  platform.  The  Railroad  Com- 
pany maintains  a  force  of  milk  handlers,  cashiers,  and  other  employees  — 
about  25  in  all  —  assigned  to  this  traffic,  sufficient  to  unload  the  milk,  load 
the  empties  for  the  return  movement,  collect  the  freight  charges,  etc.  Occas- 
ionally, of  course,  the  consignee's  truckman  will  assist  in  handling  the  milk 
from  the  car  (pp.  833,  834,  863). 

5.     Refrigeration 

The  present  rates  on  less-than-carload  shipments  include  free  icing  of  cars. 
The  Railroad  Company  has  four  icing  plants  along  its  road  for  that  purpose 
(p.  880). 

6.     Return  of  Empty  Containers 

As  the  milk  is  handled  in  specially  constructed  cars  and  the  present  rates 
include  a  return  of  the  empty  containers  to  the  original  points  of  shipment, 
there  must  necessarily  be  a  return  movement  of  each  of  the  milk  trains 
above  described,  of  the  same  general  character  as  the  initial  movement.  The 
return  movements  are  made  with  the  same  degree  of  regularity  and  on  the 
same  schedules  as  the  initial  movements.  This  return  service  is  required 
by  the  shippers.  It  is  indispensable  to  the  successful  conduct  of  their  busi- 
ness that  the  empty  containers  should  be  promptly  returned  so  as  to  be 
washed,  distributed  and  filled  ready  for  the  next  day's  shipments  (p.  834). 


351 

(b)     XEW  YORK  CENTRAL  LINES 
1.     Train  Service 

Milk  traffic  of  the  Xew  York  Central  and  West  Shore  Railroads  reaches 
Xew  York  city  and  Weehawken  terminals  in  nine  special  milk  trains,  one 
terminating  at  Weehawken,  one  at  Melrose  Junction,  Xew  York  city,  and 
seven  at  Thirty-third  street,  Xew  York  city  (p.  650).  These  nine  trains  con- 
tain about  105  cars  during  the  winter  months  and  about  130  cars  during  the 
summer  months  (p.  653).  Of  the  trains  terminating  at  Thirty-third  street. 
Xew  York  city,  one  train  contains  milk  from  the  Central  Xew  England  Rail- 
way exclusively,  and  two  trains  contain  milk  from  the  Delaware  &  Hudson 
Company  exclusively.  One  train  terminating  at  Melrose  Junction  contains 
milk  from  the  Rutland  Railroad  exclusively.  The  milk  contained  in  five  of 
the  milk  trains  terminating  at  Xew  York  city  and  Weehawken,  X.  J.,  is 
gathered  by  twenty  trains  on  various  divisions  and  branches  of  the  Xew  York 
Central  and  West  Shore  Railroads,  and  by  separate  trains  of  the  Xorwood 
&  St.  Lawrence  Railroad,  Lowville  &  Beaver  River  Railroad,  Carthage  & 
Copenhagen  Railroad,  Otsego  &  Herkimer  Railroad,  and  Albany  Southern' 
Railroad.  The  milk  traffic  received  by  the  Xew  York  Central  Railroad  from 
the  Delaware  &  Hudson  Company  at  Albany  and  Troy  originates  at  stations 
on  the  Delaware  &  Hudson  Company,  principally  in  Xew  York  State,  and  sta- 
tions on  the  Cooperstown  &  Charlotte  Valley  Railroad,  and  Schoharie  Valley 
Railway,  and  is  hauled  in  special  milk  trains  of  the  Xew  York  Central  Rail- 
road from  Albany  to  Xew  York  city.  Milk  traffic  received  by  the  Xew  York 
Central  from  the  Central  Xew  England  Railway  originates  at  points  on  the 
Central  Xew  England  Railway  in  Xew  York  State  and  is  hauled  by  the 
Xew  York  Central  Railroad  from  Beacon,  X.  Y.,  to  Thirty-third  street,  Xe\v 
York  city,  stopping  at  Tarrytown  and  Yonkers  to  detach  loaded  cars.  The 
milk  traffic  received  by  the  Xew  York  Central  Railroad  from  the  Rutland 
Railroad  originates  at  points  on  the  Rutland  Railroad  in  Xew  York  State  and 
Vermont  (principally  in  Xew  York  State)  and  is  hauled  by  the  Xew  York 
Central  by  special  milk  train  from  Chatham  to  Melrose  Junction,  a  distance 
of  123  miles  (pp.  656,  657).  There  are  three  trains  handling  milk  originating 
at  points  on  the  Xew  York  Central  and  West  Shore  Railroads  west  of  Albany, 
X.  Y.  (p.  658).  The  milk  carried  on  these  trains  is  gathered  on  eighteen 
trains  of  the  Xew  York  Central  Railroad  and  by  five  short  connecting  rail- 
roads (p.  659). 

The  average  number  of  cars  per  train  per  day  of  milk  and  cream  handled 
by  the  Xew  York  Central  and  West  Shore  Railroads  ranges  from  nine  to 
fourteen  according  to  season  (p.  660).  It  is  impracticable  to  consolidate  cars 
into  large  trains  by  reason  of  the  necessity  for  high  speed  of  the  movement 
and  early  deliveries  at  Xew  York  terminals  (p.  661). 

The  Rutland  Railroad  milk  train  leaves  Ogdensburg  at  7 : 20  A.  M.  daily  and 
arrives  at  Melrose  Junction  at  1:15  A.  M.  Lisbon  is  the  first  point  at  which 
this  train  picks  up  milk,  and  the  distance  from  Lisbon  to  Melrose  Junction. 
Xew  York  city,  is  453  miles  via  Chatham.  The  West  Snore  Railroad  milk 
train  leaves  Campbell  Hall,  X.  Y.,  at  3:50  P.  M.  daily  and  picks  up  cars  and 
loads  milk  at  stations  on  the  Walkill  Valley  Branch  and  receives  milk  from 
the  Ulster  &  Delware  Railroad  at  Kingston,  and  is  run  as  a  solid  train 
from  Kingston  to  Weehawken  stopping  at  Xewburgh  for  loading.  It  arrives 


352 

at  Weehawken  at  8:50  P.  M.  daily.  Of  the  two  trains  received  from  the 
Delaware  &  Hudson  Company,  one  leaves  Albany  at  6:49  P.  M.  and  is  run 
solid  to  Thirty-third  street,  arriving  at  12:40  A.  M.,  and  stopping  at  Yonkers 
to  detach  loaded  cars.  The  other  leaves  Green  Island  (Troy)  between  6:00 
and  7:00  P.  M.,  and  is  run  solid  to  Thirty-third  street,  arriving  between  10:30 
and  11:00  P.  M.  (p.  658).  The  most  distant  points  from  which  the  three 
milk  trains  of  the  New  York  Central  and  West  Shore  Railroads,  west  of 
Albany,  operate  are  Ogdensburg,  N.  Y.  (distance  to  New  York,  453  miles) ; 
Massena  Springs,  N.  Y.  (distance  to  New  York,  387  miles) ;  Cape  Vincent, 
N.  Y.  (distance  to  New  York,  345  miles) ;  New  Haven,  N.  Y.  (distance  to  New 
York,  305  miles) ;  and  Earlville,  N.  Y.  (distance  to  New  York,  339  miles)  (p. 
659 ) .  Of  the  three  New  York  Central  milk  trains  ,one  train  is  run  as  a  solid 
train  from  Lowville  to  Thirty-third  street  (distance,  295  miles),  another  train 
is  runs  as  a  solid  train  from  Fort  Plain,  N.  Y.,  to  Thirty-third  street  (distance, 
200  miles),  and  the  third  train  is  run  as  a  solid  train  from  Albany  to  Thirty- 
Hard  street  (distance,  142  miles)  (p.  660). 

All  trains  are  operated  daily,  including  Sundays  and  holidays.  The  aver- 
aye  speed  of  milk  trains,  exclusive  of  stops,  is  between  35  and  40  miles 
an  hour  (p.  659).  All  milk  trains  are  run  on  passenger  train  schedules  (p. 
660). 

All  milk  loaded  in  cars  at  interior  points  on  any  one  day  reaches  the  New 
York  market  from  9:00  P.  M.  of  the  same  day  to  1:15  A.  M.  of  the  following 
day  (p.  660). 

2.     Equipment 

The  milk  cars  of  the  New  York  Central  are  of  standard  passenger  con- 
struction so  far  as  the  trucks  and  air  brakes  are  concerned.  They  are  fifty 
feet  in  length  and  the  bodies  are  similar  to  baggage  or  express  cars  except 
that  the  cars  are  constructed  with  insulated  floors  and  sides,  and  with  double 
doors.  The  sides  and  roofs  of  the  cars  have  hair  felt  insulation  and  the  floor 
has  a  two-course  burlap  plastic  insulation.  The  cost  of  these  cars  has  in- 
creased from  approximately  $1,250.00  in  1889  to  $1,785.00  in  1899  and 
$3,850.00  in  1914.  The  capacity  of  the  standard  car  today  is  330  40-quart 
cans.  The  capacity  of  the  same  cars  for  12-quart  cases  of  bottled  milk  is 
584  cases  in  four  tiers.  It  is  not  practicable  to  load  more  than  one  tier  of 
cans  (pp.  688,  689). 

3.     Terminal  Facilities 

Terminal  facilities:  At  Melrose  Junction  there  is  a  milk  platform  at  which 
26  milk  cars  can  be  placed  at  one  time.  From  13  to  17  cars  of  milk  are 
handled  daily  according  to  season.  The  facilities,  therefore,  at  Melrose  Junc- 
tion, are  considerably  in  excess  of  the  current  requirements.  At  this  station 
from  16  to  18  employes  are  exclusively  concerned  with  the  delivery  of  milk 
after  arrival,  and  in  the  reloading  of  the  empty  packages  into  cars  during  the 
night. 

At  130th  Street  station  there  are  milk  platforms  and  facilities  for  delivery 
of  40  cars  of  milk  at  one  time.  At  this  station  from  26  to  30  employees  are 
exclusively  concerned  with  the  delivery  of  milk  traffic,  and  the  handling  of  the 
empty  packages.  At  this  station  75  per  cent,  of  the  time  consumed  by  night 
switch  engine  is  devoted  to  switching  milk  cars. 


353 

At  Thirty-third  street  station  there  are  milk  platforms  at  which  32  cars  are 
placed  at  one  time  on  three  tracks  adjoining  three  unloading  platforms  with 
two  driveways;  there  are  also  milk  platforms  and  freight  station  platforms 
at  which  from  18  to  23  cars  are  handled.  At  this  station  from  44  to  04 
employes  are  exclusively  concerned  with  the  delivery  of  milk  traffic.  At  this 
station  one  night  switch  engine  is  assigned  to  switching  milk  cars. 

At  Weehawken  there  are  five  platforms  at  which  milk  is  unloaded  from  cars 
on  five  adjonining  tracks  having  capacity  for  46  cars  at  one  time.  Of  these, 
one  platform  and  track  is  used  for  West  Shore  Railroad  milk,  and  four  plat- 
forms and  tracks  for  milk  of  the  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western  Railway, 
which  uses  the  terminals  of  the  West  Shore  Railroad  at  Weehawken.  At  this 
station  from  15  to  18  employes  are  exclusively  concerned  with  the  delivery 
of  West  Shore  Railroad  milk  and  the  handling  of  the  empty  packages. 

All  of  the  station  facilities  assigned  for  the  delivery  of  milk  and  cream 
traffic  and  the  receiving  of  empty  packages  or  containers  at  Melrose  Junc- 
tion, One  Hundred  Thirtieth  street  and  Thirty-third  street,  New  York  city, 
and  Weehawken,  N.  J.,  are  used  exclusively  for  the  handling  of  such  traffic 
and  are  not  practically  available  for  the  handling  of  other  traffic 
(pp.  622).  The  facilities  of  the  New  York  Central  Railroad  today  at  Melrose 
Junction  are  33  1-3  per  cent  in  excess  of  the  current  requirements,  and  there 
is  ample  space  for  increasing  the  facilities  for  the  milk  traffic  five -fold.  .  The 
terminal  facilities  at  Thirty-third  street  and  at  Weehawken  are  also  in  excess 
of  the  requirements  (p.  663).  The  plans  for  the  elevation  and  depression  of 
the  New  York  Central  tracks  on  the  west  side  of  New  York  city  contemplate 
the  erection  of  milk  platforms  and  tracks  at  a  new  Thirty-third  street  station 
with  a  capacity  of  61  cars  at  one  time,  on  six  tracks  with  six  platforms  and 
three  driveways,  and  at  One  Hundred  and  Thirtieth  street  the  plans  contem- 
plate platforms  and  tracks  for  47  milk  cars  at  one  time  (p.  664).  These  plans 
are  undergoing  revision  to  increase  the  facilities  at  One  Hundred  and  Thirtieth 
street  to  accommodate  66  cars  at  one  time  (p.  665). 

The  employes  at  milk  terminals  are  paid  by  the  day  and  are  not  available 
for  other  services.  The  report  around  8:00  o'clock  in  the  evening  and  get 
through  about  4:00  in  the  morning.  They  are  handling  empties  until  the 
trains  arrive,  then  they  unload  the  filled  packages  and  load  the  empties 
brought  by  the  draymen  (p.  748). 

4.     Return  of  Empty  Containers 

The  cars  containing  empty  packages  or  containers  are  returned  daily  to 
points  of  origin  by  special  train  movement  (p.  659). 

(c)     LEHIGH  VALLEY  RAILROAD  COMPANY 

1.     Train  Service 

The  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad  Company  operates  two  special  through  milk 
trains:  One  from  North  Fair  Haven  on  Lake  Ontario,  386  miles  from  Jersey 
City  (p.  886);  and  the  other  from  Canastota,  N.  Y.,  382  miles  from  Jerse\ 
City  (p.  888).  The  train  originating  at  North  Fair  Haven  leaves  that  point 
at  7:50  A.  M.,  arrives  at  Sayre,  Pa.,  at  1:30  P.  M.,  where  it  picks  up  the 
cars  of  milk  previously  assembled  at  that  point  by  three  other  trains  and 
at  3:30  P.  M.  arrives  at  Tunkhannock,  Pa.,  where  the  milk  from  three  more 

12 


354 

trains  is  picked  up,  making  a  total  of  15  cars  gathered  into  one  train  by 
six  gathering  trains.  From  Timkhannock  to  Jersey  City,  a  distance  of  207 
miles,  it  runs  as  a  solid  train,  arriving  at  destination  at  10:30  P.  M.  (pp.  886, 
887).  The  other  through  train  which  starts  from  Canastota  at  9:15  A.  M. 
and  arrives  at  destination,  Jersey  City,  at  11:00  P.  M.,  picks  up  8  cars  of 
milk  on  the  Elmira  and  Cortland  Branch  between  Canastota  and  Van  Etten, 
N.  Y.,  and  at  Newark  picks  up  3  more  cars  of  milk  left  at  that  point  by 
the  "  Jersey  Little  Milk  Train."  The  operation  of  this  second  through  milk 
train  was  made  necessary  by  the  demands  of  the  shippers  on  the  Elmira  and 
Cortland  Branch  for  a  better  loading  and  shipping  hour  in  order  that  they 
frould  be  enabled  thereby  to  meet  the  milk  requirements  of  the  Board  of 
Health  of  New  York  city  (pp.  888,  892).  Before  the  time  for  the  departure 
of  this  train  from  Canastota  was  set  back  to  9:15  A.  M.  it  was  run  so  as 
to  connect  at  Sayre,  Pa.,  with  the  first  through  milk  train  above  described. 
From  Sayre,  Pa.,  to  Jersey  City,  therefore,  the  same  quantity  of  milk  that 
must  now  be  handled  by  two  trains  was  formerly  handled  by  one  (pp.  894, 
954).  Without  this  change,  however,  that  is,  making  the  train  leave  Can- 
astota one  hour  and  twenty  minutes  later  than  formerly,  which  results  in 
the  necessity  of  operating  it  from  Sayre,  Pa.,  to  Jersey  City,  as  a  separate 
train,  the  milk  producers  on  the  Elmira  and  Cortland  Branch  would  not  have 
sufficient  time  in  which  to  prepare  their  milk  for  shipment  and  consequently 
could  not  ship  (pp.  954,  955). 

In  addition  to  the  two  trains  above  described,  a  train  known  as  the  "  Jersey 
Little  Milk  Train,"  carrying  on  an  average  of  five  cars,  is  operated  from 
Easton,  Pa.,  to  handle  the  milk  shipments  from  points  in  New  Jersey.  At 
South  Plainfield  one  car  is  detached  for  Perth  Amboy,  and  less  than  carload 
shipments  are  unloaded  also  at  South  Plainfield,  Roselle  Park  and  West  Eliza- 
beth. At  Newark  three  cars  are  detached  to  be  moved  thence  to  Jersey  City 
by  the  through  train  from  Canastota  (pp.  887,  919). 

2.     Equipment 

The  milk  cars  on  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad  are  of  the  most  approved  type 
of  milk  car  construction.  Of  the  136  cars  used  to  handle  the  traffic,  40  will 
carry  225  40-quart  cans,  or  600  12-quart  cases  each,  while  each  of  the  remain- 
ing 96  cars  will  carry  320  40-quart  cans  or  725  12-quart  cases  (p.  890).  They 
are  constructed  on  pa&senger  equipment  lines,  most  of  them  having  steel  under" 
frames  and  passenger  car  running  gear,  which  is  necessary  on  account  of  the 
high  speed  at  which  they  are  operated  (pp.  913,  914).  Ice  bunkers  are 
located  in  each  corner  of  the  car  separated  by  a  vestibule  in  the  end  of  the 
car  with  a  tight-fitting  door  in  addition  to  the  outside  end  door  so  arranged 
that  by  the  use  of  these  two  doors  the  interior  main  body  of  the  car  need  not 
be  opened  to  the  outside  temperature.  The  cars  are  insulated  (p.  913).  The 
locomotives  which  haul  the  milk  trains  are  of  the  best  typo  iu  use  on  the  rail- 
road (p.  968). 

3.     Terminal  Facilities 

For  the  exclusive  use  and  accommodation  of  its  milk  and  cream  traffic,  the 
Lehigh  Valley  maintains  and  operates  a  milk  terminal  at  Warren  street, 
Jersey  City,  which  has  a  capacity  of  24  milk  cars;  another  at  Avenue  D, 
Jersey  City  with  a  capacity  of  four  cars;  and  a  third  at  Pioneer  street, 


355 

Newark,  with  a  capacity  of  five  cars.  No  other  freight  of  any  kind  is  handled 
at  these  special  milk  terminals  (p.  894).  At  Warren  street,  the  Company 
employs  a  foreman,  assistant  foreman,  an  inspector,  two  milk  clerks-  and  a 
force  of  from  21  to  22  milk  handlers  to  handle  the  traffic  (pp.  896,  940).  At 
the  other  terminals  proportionate  crews  are  employed.  These  men  handle 
milk  shipments  only. 

In  addition  to  the  milk  handlers  at  the  terminals,  all  milk  trains  while 
running  through  the  milk  districts  carry  extra  men  to  assist  in  handling  the 
less  than  carload  shipments  of  filled  and  empty  containers  (pp.  895,  901),  in 
order  that  there  will  be  as  little  delay  as  possible  at  the  stations  (p.  895). 

The  work  of  unloading  the  less  than  carload  shipments  from  the  cars  to 
the  platforms  and  of  loading  into  the  cars  the  1.  c  1.  shipments  of  empty 
containers  to  be  returned  to  the  shipping  points,  is  performed  exclusively  by 
railroad  employees;  they  being  the  only  persons,  according  to  the  Company's 
rules,  who  are  allowed  to  enter  the  cars  (pp.  885,  894,  942). 

4.     Return  of  Empties 

All  of  the  cars  brought  to  Jersey  City  in  the  two  special  milk  trains  above 
referred  to  are  returned  in  one  train  which  leaves  Jersey  City  at  2:30  A.  TSI. 
and  runs  as  a  solid  train  to  Sayre,  Pa.,  where  eight  other  trains  are  utilized 
in  distibuting  the  milk  cars  and  empty  containers  to  the  various  points  of 
production  on  the  main  and  branch  lines. 

The  Jersey  Little  Milk  train  on  its  return  movement  leaves  Jersey  City 
at  2:00  A.  M.  and  distributes  the  empty  cans  and  cases  to  the  milk  shipping 
stations  in  New  Jersey. 

These  returning  trains  of  empty  containers  require  and  are  given  the  same 
expeditious  handling  on  their  return  movements  as  they  receive  on  the  move- 
ment into  New  York. 

All  milk  trains  are  operated  at  passenger  train  speed  (p.  970).  No  trains 
on  the  road  have  faster  schedules.  Trains  carrying  all  other  traffic,  includ- 
ing in  many  instances,  passenger  trains,  are  sidetracked  (L.  V.  Exhibit  6) 
whenever  such  is  necessary  to  insure  the  arrival  of  the  milk  trains  at  desti- 
nation on  time.  Every  effort  is  made  to  give  the  traffic  the  preferred  handling 
which  by  nature  it  requires  (pp.  889,  974). 

5.     Refrigeration 

Refrigeration  is  a  service  which  is  included  in  the  present  less  than  carload 
rates.  In  furnishing  this  refrigeration  service  the  Lehigh  Valley  Ralroad  uses 
annually  about  30,000  tons  of  ice.  For  approximately  240  days  of  each  year 
it  is  required  to  ice  its  milk  cars  to  full  bunker  capacity,  while  even  for  the 
remainder  of  the  year  partial  icing  is  necessary.  For  the  entire  year  the  aver- 
age amount  of  ice  furnished  daily  per  car  by  the  Railroad  Company  is  3.41 
tons.  Seven  icing  stations,  located  on  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad,  are  used 
exclusively  to  ice  milk  shipments  (p.  896). 

(d)     ERIE  RAILROAD  COMPANY 

1.     Train  Service 

The  milk  train  service  on  the  Erie  Railroad  consists  of  four  trains,  one 
starting  at  Salamanca,  413  miles  from  Jersey  City,  at  7:30  A.  M.,  arriving  at 
Jersey  City  11:55  P.  M.  This  train  takes  care  of  the  milk  shipments  offered 


356 

at  stations  on  the  Alleghany  Division  and  the  Susquehanna  Division  from 
Hinsdale  to  Hickory  Grove,  inclusive.  From  June  1  to  Dec.  31,  1915,  it  is 
necessary  to  run  this  train  in  two  sections  over  the  Alleghany  Division  in 
order  to  bring  the  milk  and  cream  into  Jersey  City  on  scheidu'e  time.  One 
section  starts  at  Salamanca  7:30  A.  M.,  the  other  at  Cuba,  383  miles  from 
Jersey  City,  at  10:00  A.  M.  The  two  sections  are  consolidated  at  Hornell,  331 
miles  from  Jersey  City.  From  August  4  to  October  14,  it  is  necessary  to 
run  this  train  in  two  sections,  not  only  over  the  Alleghany  Division  but  also 
over  the  Susquehanna  Division.  In  other  words,  the  two  sections  are  con- 
solidated during  this  period  at  Susquehanna,  192  miles  from  Jersey  City, 
instead  of  at  Hornell,  331  miles  from  Jersey  City.  This  train  picks  up  cars 
at  Hornell  from  the  Buffalo  Division,  at  Corning  from  the  Rochester  Division, 
at  Elmira  from  the  Tioga  Division,  and  at  Susquehanna  from  the  Jefferson 
Division,  the  cars  having  been  brought  from  these  branch  lines  to  the  junction 
points  in  local  passenger  trains  (pp.  1067-1069). 

The  second  train  starts  at  Susquehanna,  192  miles  from  Jersey  City,  at 
10:50  A.  M.,  arriving  at  Jersey  City  at  10:15  P.  M.  This  train  picks  up  cars 
and  loads  milk  from  stations  Susquehanna,  Pa.,  to  Greycourt,  N.  Y.,  and  picks 
up  cars  from  branch  lines  at  Lackawaxen,  Pa.,  from  the  Wyoming  Division, 
at  Middletown,  N.  Y.,  from  the  Middletown  and  Crawford  Branch,  at  Goshen, 
N.  Y.,  from  the  Lehigh  &  New  England  Railroad,  and  from  the  Montgomery 
Branch  of  the  Erie  Railroad,  and  at  Greycourt  from  the  Newburgh  branch 
(pp.  1070-1071). 

The  third  train  leaves  Pine  Island,  N.  Y.,  71  miles  from  New  York,  at  4:09 
P.  M.  Picks  up  cars  and  loads  milk  on  the  Pine  Island  Branch,  at  Goshen  on 
the  main  line  and  other  milk  stations  between  Goshen  and  Monroe,  N.  Y., 
from  which  point  it  runs  through  to  Jersey  City,  arriving  9:20  P.  M.  This 
train  picks  up  milk  at  Greycourt  from  the  Lehigh  &  Hudson  Railway  and  from 
the  Newburgh  Branch  of  the  Erie  Railroad  (p.  1071). 

In  addition  to  these  three  trains  a  special  train  is  run  daily  from  Wald- 
wick,  N.  Y.,  to  Newark,  N.  J.,  and  return,  which  takes  L.  C.  L.  shipments  and 
cars  from  the  above  three  milk  trains,  and  delivers  them  at  Ridgewood,  Pater- 
son,  Passaic,  Rutherford  and  Newark,  N.  J.  (pp.  1070-71). 

The  New  York,  Susquehanna  &  Western  Railroad  has  a  train  which  leaves 
Hanford,  N.  J.,  73  miles  from  Jersey  City,  at  3:58  P.  M.  This  train  picks  up 
cars  from  the  Middletown  and  Unionville  Railroad  at  Hanford,  and  loads  milk 
at  milk  stations,  Hanford  to  Franklin  Furnace  inclusive.  Another  train 
leaves  Stroudsburg,  101  miles  from  Jersey  City,  at  3:26  P.  M.,  and  picks  up 
cars  and  loads  milk  at  milk  stations  Hainesburg  to  Sparta,  N.  J.,  inclusive. 
These  two  trains  are  consolidated  at  Beaver  Lake,  N.  J.,  53  miles  from  Jersey 
City,  and  run  through  to  Jersey  City,  arriving  9:38  P.  M.  From  this  train 
milk  is  unloaded  at  Butler,  North  Paterson,  Paterson,  Hackensack,  Ridgefield 
Park  and  Homestead,  N.  J.,  and  cars  are  set  off  at  Paterson  and  Hackensack 
(pp.  1071-1072). 

Milk  trains  are  run  on  a  regular  schedule,  and  between  station  their  run- 
ning time  is  often  as  high  as  sixty  miles  an  hour.  This  high  speed  is  neces- 
sary in  order  to  take  care  of  the  delays  necessary  in  loading  and  bring  trains 
in  on  their  schedule  time.  Milk  trains  are  given  preference  over  high-class  pas- 
senger trains.  When  necessary  through  passenger  trains  are  sidetracked  in 


357 

order  to  get  milk  trains  through  on  their  schedule  time.     No  trains  on  the 
run  run  faster  than  milk  trains  between  stations   (pp.  1078-1081). 

Passenger  engines  of  the  very  highest  type  are  used  on  the  milk  trains 
(p.  1133). 

2.     Terminal  Service 

The  milk  platforms  of  the  Erie  Railroad  and  New  York,  Susquehanna  & 
Western  Railroad  are  located  at  Pavonia  avenue,  Jersey  City,  near  the  pas- 
senger station  (pp.  1055-6). 

There  are  five  platforms  for  handling  the  milk  shipped  via  Erie  Railroad 
and  two  for  the  milk  shipped  via.  the  N.  Y.  S.  &  W.  These  platforms  will 
accommodate  sixty  cars.  There  are  38  to  40  milk  handlers  at  these  platforms 
exclusively  engaged  in  unloading  milk  and  loading  the  empties.  These  milk 
handlers  receive  $45.00  a  month.  In  addition  to  this  force  the  Milk  Agent 
at  Jersey  City  has  a  foreman,  cashier  and  two  clerks.  In  addition  to  the 
milk  handlers  at  Jersey  City  there  are  also  milk  handlers  on  all  the  trains, 
whose  business  it  is  to  load  the  milk.  One  switch  engine  is  used  exclusively 
in  switching  the  milk  cars  and  setting  them  alongside  the  platforms  at  Jersey 
City  (pp.  1073,  1114,  1120). 

3.     Return  of  Empties 

The  empty  cans  and  cases  are  returned  by  three  trains  daily  on  the  Erie 
Railroad  and  one  on  the  N.  Y.  S.  &  W.  The  first  train  on  the  Erie  leaves 
Jersey  City  at  2:35  A.  M.,  the  second  3:45  A.  M.,  and  the  third  at  4:30  A.  M. 
The  N.  Y.  S.  &  W.  train  leaves  Jersey  City  3:25  A.  M.  (p.  1072). 

(e)     PENNSYLVANIA  RAILROAD  COMPANY 
1.     Train  Service 

The  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Company  operates  but  one  milk  train  into  New 
York  city,  a  train  known  as  BF  10,  which  was  established  May  25th,  1913 
(p.  1531).  This  train  originates  at  East  Aurora  in  western  New  York,  and 
runs  daily  between  that  point  and  New  York  city,  leaving  East  Aurora  cus- 
tomarily at  8  A.  M.  and  arriving  at  Jersey  City  at  12:15  A.  M.  and  at  Flat- 
bush  avenue,  Brooklyn,  at  1  A.  M.  (p.  1481). 

The  train  is  graphically  pictured  on  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Exhibit  No.  1, 
and  the  service  rendered  thereby  is  described  in  detail  by  Mr.  Nathans,  the 
Milk  Agent  of  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  Company,  in  his  testimony  on  pages 
1472  and  1481. 

The  train  picks  up  cars  at  various  points  along  its  route  between  East 
Aurora,  N.  Y.,  and  Harrisburg,  Pa.  The  number  of  cars  which  it  moves  varies 
from  18  or  20  to  9  or  10  (p.  1479).  When  it  is  running  heaviest,  it  some- 
times requires  two  engines  between  Williamsport  and  Harrisburg  and  runs 
in  two  sections  between  Harrisburg  and  Philadelphia  (pp.  1502,  3,  4). 

The  train  is  classified  at  Olean,  at  Emporium  Junction,  and  at  Williams- 
port. 

During  the  typical  period  selected  for  special  investigation  at  the  request 
of  the  complainants'  counsel  (pp.  1484-5).  the  traffic  transported  on  the  train 
was  exclusively  milk  and  cream,  except  for  certain  express  traffic  which 
averaged  only  3-10  of  a  car  (p.  1485). 

The  distance  from  East  Aurora  to  Flatbush  avenue,  Brooklyn,  is  approxi- 
mately five  hundred  miles. 


358 

While  BF  10  is  the  only  milk  train  operated  by  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad 
Company  into  New  York  city,  a  small  quantity  of  milk  is  handled  from  points 
in  New  Jersey.  This  milk  is  referred  to  by  Mr.  Nathans  in  his  testimony  on 
page  1473.  It  consists  of  two  cars,  one  moving  from  Trenton,  the  other  from 
Plainsboro,  N.  J.,  to  Jersey  City,  in  Adams  Express  trains. 

2.     Equipment 

The  cars  used  for  the  transportation  of  this  milk  are  of  three  kinds, 
referred  to  at  the  foot  of  page  32  in  the  brief  filed  on  behalf  of  the  respond- 
ents in  the  Philadelphia  Milk  Exchange  case,  docket  No.  7826.  The  note  at 
this  point  reads  as  follows: 

"  The  testimony  shows-  that  the  cars  used  in  the  milk  service  involve 
an  investment  of  more  than  half  a  millon  dollars  and  include  94  refrigera- 
tor cars,  costing  approximately  $1,595,  each  (234-235) ;  27  cars  known  as 
the  B-D.  R.  type,  baggage  cars  fitted  up  specially  as  refrigerators  both 
in  lining,  insulation  and  ice  bunkers  costing  $3,255  each  (235);  and  36 
60-foot  steel  refrigerators  known  as  the  R.  60  type  (233),  costing  $7,665 
each  (235).  It  is  obvious  that  the  equipment  is  of  more  than  ordinary 
value." 

3.     Return  of  Empty  Containers 

The  empty  cans  are  returned  to  the  point  of  shipment  with  substantially 
the  same  service  and  the  same  expedition  as  the  initial  movement  (p.  1501). 

(f)     NEW  YORK,  ONTARIO  AND  WESTERN  RAILWAY 
1.     Train  Service 

The  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western  Railway  Company  operate  three  special 
milk  trains  as  follows:  Train  No.  14  leaves  Oswego,  N.  Y  ,  a  point  325  miles 
from  Weehawken,  N.  J.,  at  8:35  A.  M.,  and  picks  up  milk  on  the  main  line 
from  that  point  to  Sidney,  a  distance  of  125  miles.  It  also  takes  the  milk 
from  the  Rome  and  Utica  Branches  and  runs  as  a  solid  train  from  Sidney, 
N.  Y.,  to  Weehawken,  N.  J.,  a  distance  of  200  miles,  arriving  at  11:05  P.  M. 

Train  No.  10  leaves  Edmeston,  N.  Y.,  a  point  282  miles  from  Weehawken, 
N.  J.,  at  11:20  A.  M.,  and  arrives  at  destination  at  9:50  P.  M.  This  train 
moves  the  milk  from  the  New  Berlin  Branch,  the  Unadilla  Valley  Railroad, 
the  Scranton  Branch,  the  Port  Jervis  and  Kingston  branches,  and  the  Central 
New  England  Railway. 

Train  No.  12  originates  at  Sidney,  N.  Y.,  a  point  200  miles  from  Wee- 
hawken, N.  J.  Its  load  is  gathered  from  points  on  the  main  line  to  Cornwall, 
N.  Y.,  and  from  the  Delaware  and  Northern  Railroad,  Delhi  Branch,  and  from 
the  Middletown  and  Union  Railroad.  This  train  arrives  at  Weehawken  at 
8:55  P.  M. 

2.     Terminal  Facilities 

The  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western  Railway  Co.  has  only  one  milk  terminal, 
which  is  located  at  Weehawken,  N.  J.  The  terminal  facilities  are  furnished 
by  the  New  York  Central  Railroad  Co.,  but  the  labor  necessary  to  handle  the 
business  is  furnished  by  the  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western  Ry.  Co.,  and  con- 
sists of  a  milk  freight  collector,  who  has  an  office  force  besides  himself  of 
four  men,  and  an  outside  or  platform  force  consisting  of  a  foreman  and  30  or 
40  men,  according  to  the  demands  of  the  traffic  at  different  seasons  of  the  year. 


359 

IV.  VOLUME  OF  THE  MILK  TRAFFIC 

The  Erie  Railroad  revenue  from  the  milk  and  cream  traffic  for  the  year  1915 
on  shipments  originating  on  its  line  and  excluding  those  received  from  con- 
nections was  $588,439.91  (Wheeler  Exhibit  No.  1,  p.  1084).  The  corresponding 
figure  for  the  New  York,  Susquehanna  &  Western  Railroad  was  $78,184.33. 
(Wheeler  Exhibit  No.  2,  pp.  1084,  1085). 

During  the  year  1915,  the  New  York,  Ontario  &  Western  Railway  moved 
2,335,751  40-quart  cans  of  milk  and  176,003  40-quart  cans  of  cream,  and  the 
gross  revenue  from  this  traffic  was  $870,035.55. 

During  the  year  ending  September  30,  1915,  the  Lehigh  Valley  carried  to 
the  New  York  market  1,728,099  40-quart  cans  of  milk  and  cream,  and 
1,  318,673  12-quart  cases  of  milk,  making  a  total,  when  reduced  to  units  of 
40-quart  cans  of  2,123,702.  Of  this  total  82,305  40-quart  cans  were  cream 
(p.  885).  The  total  revenue  derived  from  this  traffic  for  the  same  year  was 
$746,321.39  (p.  893). 

The  shipments  over  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  &  Western  for  the  year  1915 
aggregated  3,087,589  cans  of  milk  and  88,657  cans  of  cream  (Milk  Reporter 
Exhibit  No.  2).  The  gross  revenue  derived  by  this  road  from  all  of  its  milk 
and  cream  traffic  interstate  for  the  year  1915  was  $919,947.83  and  on  its  intra- 
state  traffic  was  $195,944.04  (Zippel  Exhibit  No.  1). 

Of  the  entire  milk  and  cream  traffic  transported  to  New  York  Harbor  termi- 
nals by  common  carriers  the  New  York  Central  and  West  Shore  Railoads 
handle  approximately  38  per  cent  of  which  over  90  per  cent,  originates  in  New 
York  State  and  is  transported  entirely  within  the  State  (p.  653).  The  total 
number  of  40-quart  cans  of  milk,  cream  and  condensed  milk  handled  by  the 
West  Shore  was  884,613  and  the  long  haul  milk  on  the  New  York  Central 
totaled  5,205,720  40-quart  cans  (Milk  Reporter,  Exhibit  No.  1).  The  total 
earnings  of  the  New  York  Central  and  West  Shore  from  the  traffic  were  in 
1915,  $2,024,144.71  (Kallman  Exhibit  No.  1,  p.  654). 

A  statement  filed  by  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  in  a  letter  to  the  Commis- 
sion, dated  May  11,  1916,  showing  the  volume  of  milk  traffic  shipped  to  the 
New  York  district  for  the  first  seven  days  of  each  month  of  the  year  1915, 
gives  a  total  of  3,734,670  quarts,  the  revenue  on  which  was  $35,726.98.  The 
revenue  for  the  year  would  be  approximately  four  and  one-third  times  this,  or 
$150,000. 

V.  FLUCTUATION  IN  VOLUME  OF  MOVEMENT 

The  milk  traffic  is  not  regular  in  amount,  but  varies  very  much  from  day 
to  day,  depending  upon  the  New  York  demand.  If  the  demand  for  whole 
milk  in  New  York  city  falls  off,  the  milk  in  the  country  is  used  for  making 
cream,  condensed  milk,  butter  or  cheese.  In  the  summer  season  milk  shipping 
stations  may  ship  one  day  150  cans  of  milk  and  the  next  day  10  or  15  cans 
of  cream,  or  possibly  nothing.  The  milk  shipping  station  is  usually  owned  by 
the  New  York  dealer,  and  his  shipments  are  controlled  by  the  demand  in  that 
market.  He  will  manufacture  in  the  country  if  there  is  no  demand  for  whole 
milk.  The  railroads  have  to  provide  equipment  to  handle  the  maximum 
quantity  of  business,  although  it  varies  from  day  to  day  (pp.  1073-75) f  The 
result  of  this  fluctuation  in  business  is  the  light  loading  of  cars  (pp.  1077- 
1078).  The  receiver  in  New  York  telephones  or  telegraphs  the  milk  shipping 
station  or  creamery  that  whole  milk  shall  not  be  shipped,  that  it  shall  be  con- 


360 

densed  or  made  into  cream.  The  railroad  company  does  not  know  until  the 
train  arrives  at  the  station  what  the  shipments  will  be  and  therefore  has  to 
run  cars  to  take  care  of  the  possible  maximum  (p.  1118). 

In  presenting  herewith  the  statement  made  by  the  carriers  be- 
fore the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  it  should  be  under- 
stood that  this  Committee  includes  it  herein  so  that  the  history  of 
the  methods  of  transportation  may  be  put  on  the  record.  Any 
claims  or  conclusions  unconnected  with  the  movement  of  milk 
trains  are  not  to  be  taken  or  accepted  as  the  conclusion  of  this 
Committee. 

EXHIBIT  300 

The  Committee  had  the  advantage  of  the  testimony  of  Mr.  John 
J.  Dillon,  present  Commissioner  of  Foods  and  Markets  of  the 
State  of  New  York,  and  of  certain  other  witnesses  who  seem  to 
be  concerned  in  its  work.  The  testimony  given  by  those  gentle- 
men follows: 

JOHN  J.  DILLON,  called  as  a  witness,  testified: 
"  I  reside  in  the  city  of  New  York.  The  title  of  my  office  is 
Commissioner  of  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets.  That 
is  a  State  Department.  The  powers  of  the  office  are  designed  and 
intended  to  be  administered  throughout  the  State.  It  is  not  ex- 
clusively for  the  city  of  New  York.  The  Department  was  created 
in  April,  1914,  but  a  commission  was  not  appointed  until  December 
of  that  year.  The  organization  of  the  department  was  begun  about 
the  first  of  the  year  1915.  It  was  a  new  departure.  The  act  de- 
fined its  purposes. 

Mr.  Ward.—  What  was  that  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  To  help  find  a  profitable  market  for  the  products 
of  the  farms  of  the  State,  investigate  the  conditions  of  distribution 
of  farm  food  products  in  all  its  phases,  and  to  effect  and  establish 
an  efficient  and  economic  system  for  the  distribution  of  farm  food 
products  in  the  hope  that  the  saving  and  distribution  would  result 
in  a  better  reward  to  the  farmer  and  a  cheaper  food  to  the  consum- 
ing public. 

I  gather  that  as  having  knowledge  of  the  purposes  and  not  the 
act  itself.  I  was  appointed  the  first  commissioner.  The  law  is  a 


3G1 

part  of  the  General  Business  Law  of  the  State.  It  is  not  an  Agri- 
cultural Law.  $15,000  was  appropriated  in  1914.  The  act 
provided  a  salary  for  me  of  $6,000  a  year.  There  Avas  no  hudget 
in  the  appropriation.  Governor  Glynn  was  Governor. 

It  originated  in  this  way.  The  l^ew  York  State  Agricultural 
Society  called  a  special  meeting  to  consider  a  means  for  affecting 
better  distribution  of  farm  food  products.  I  think  it  was  in 
1912.  After  a  two  days'  discussion  of  the  problem,  no  satisfactory 
measure  was  developed  and  as  a  final  resort  the  convention  pro- 
vided for  a  State  standing  committee  on  co-operation  and  they  ap- 
pointed me  chairman  of  that  committee  with  power  to  organize 
my  own  committee  to  work  out  the  problem.  I  went  to  Europe 
that  summer  to  study  the  problems  over  there  and  after  my  return 
I  worked  on  it  for  about  a  year  with  a  committee  that  I  devised 
of  about  one  hundred  of  the  leading  agricultural  men  throughout 
the  State,  including  representatives  of  the  different  State  institu- 
tions, and  we  developed  this  bill  and  this  plan  as  a  result  of  the 
work  of  that  committee. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Will  you  give  us  a  sketch  of  where  you  studied  in 
Europe,  of  what  markets  and  where  and  what  you  absorbed  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  In  Brussels,  in  Antwerp,  in  Paris,  in  Leon  and 
in  Berne,  and  I  did  not  go  into  Germany,  but  in  England  and  I 
went  through  gome  of  the  Irish  markets. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  long  a  time  were  you  engaged  in  that  work  \ 

Mr.  Dillon. — Well  that  was  not  —  I  did  that  work  in  connec- 
tion with  a  vacation  and  I  did  not  keep  —  I  think  may  be  half  of 
my  time  abroad  while  I  was  well ;  I  think  I  put  in  probably  about 
five  or  six  weeks  of  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  any  distinguishing  features  of  the  economical 
distribution  of  food  products  which  are  not  practiced  by  us  strike 
you  in  that  investigation  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  they  did.  Conditions  over  there  are  quite 
different  from  our  conditions  and  our  problems  here,  so  that  my 
conclusion  was  and  my  report  was  that  we  could  not  hope  to  take 
in  its  entirety  any  of  their  systems  over  there  and  transfer  them 
here  and  expect  them  to  work  out  to  solve  our  problems. 


362 

Mr.  Ward.— Why  not? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  because  the  conditions  are  quite  different. 

Mr.  Ward.— Well,  why? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  For  example,  the  markets  over  there  are  supplied 
quite  largely  from  the  farming  country  surrounding  the  cities  and 
towns,  even  in  as  big  a  place  as  Paris,  the  great  bulk  of  the  produce 
is  brought  in  on  the  wagons  in  the  early  morning  to  the  Hall 
Centrale. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  kind  of  products  do  you  refer  to? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  refer  to  all  vegetables  and  food  products  and  to 
some  of  their  native  poultry  and  meat  products. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  the  fruits  of  Southern  France  will  be  in  sea- 
son in  the  markets  of  Northern  France,  as  here. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  They  get  some  of  those,  but  the  difference  is  this, 
that  with  them  the  great  bulk  of  their  food  products  come  from 
their  own  environment  and  a  smaller  portion  comes  from  a  dis- 
tance. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Butter,  cheese  and  wheat  won't  come  from  their 
own  environments. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  No,  sir,  but  they  come  —  their  products  —  but 
as  I  say,  the  bulk  of  their  products,  particularly  vegetables  and 
fruits,  come  from  the  nearby  farms. 

Mr.  Ward.—  That  is  the  current  fruits  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  ones  that  in  season  at  that  market  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  they  are  abundantly  supplied ;  those  markets 
are  abundantly  supplied  from  all  over  the  world. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  may  be,  but  as  far  as  my  observation  went, 
as  far  as  my  information  goes  now,  the  bulk  of  their  products 
came  from  their  environments  there. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  cannot  be  possible  in  the  city  of  London. 


363 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  the  city  of  London  is  quite  different.  The 
city  of  London  does  get  its  large  products  —  but  there  is  nothing 
in  the  London  market  to  my  mind  that  particularly  commends  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Is  there  anything  in  the  Paris  market  that  does  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  sir ;  there  is  very  much  in  the  Paris  market. 
In  the  first  place,  the  assembling  of  the  products  there  for  the 
general  market;  they  have  one  general  market  there  right  in  the 
heart  of  the  city ;  it  is  around  the  Hall  Centrale ;  there  are  some 
22  acres.  I  think  they  are  under  one  market.  It  is  owned  by 
the  city  of  Paris  operated  under  the  State  and  city,  controlled  by 
officials ;  it  is  entirely  under  the  hands  of  the  national  officials. 

Mr.  Ward. —  They  have  control  of  it,  but  who  actually  does  the 
bringing  in  of  merchandise  and  the  selling  of  merchandise,  and 
for  whose  account,  individual  traders  or  by  the  city  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  It  is  done  by  the  city  and  by  the  President  of 
the  Prefect;  that  is  what  they  call  him  there.  The  city  govern- 
ment and  state  government  are  very  closely  interwoven  one  with 
the  other,  and  the  market  there  —  I  have  not  looked  that  up  very 
recently  and  I  cannot  be  sure,  who  does  the  selling,  but  my  recol- 
lection is  that  it  was  largely  under  the  control  of  the  Prefect  of 
the  district  there.  The  farmers  in  the  neighborhood  bring  their 
products  in  very  early  in  the  morning  and  display  them,  many  of 
them  right  out  on  the  streets  and  in  the  yards,  and  they  have  a 
certain  number  of  hours  up  to  half -past  seven  in  the  morning  they 
have  the  use  of  those  streets  for  their  market.  Then  the  produce 
that  comes  in  from  a  distance  is  consigned  to  the  market;  it  is 
handled  there  by  the  officials,  city  and  prefect  officials.  They  act 
as  salesmen  and  they  sell  very  much  of  it  at  auction.  There  are 
state  weighers  licensed  by  the  state  and  any  buyer  has  a  right  to 
put  his  food  on  the  scales  and  have  it  weighed,  an  official  weighing 
of  it.  We  have  no  such  system  that  I  know  of  here.  We  have  the 
privilege  here  of  having  the  scales  tested,  but  there  the  scale  is 
not  only  tested,  but  one  man  becomes  an  official  weigher.  There 
is  a  fixed  scale  of  prices  for  that  and  the  man  that  requests  the 
service  pays  for  it. 


S64 

Mr.  Ward.: —  So  that  the  state  appointed  officials  to  act  as  com- 
mission men  or  distributors. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  hardly,  I  would  hardly  designate  him  aa 
a  commission  man,  but  he  acts  as  a  factor  in  distribution. 

Mr.  Ward. —  For  a  commission  or  percentage? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  did  not  go  into  that  to  know  whether  that  per- 
centage is  paid  into  a  general  fund  and  then  he  is  paid  a  salary 
or  whether  that  just  goes  to  him. 

Mr.  Ward. —  In  either  event,  it  would  be  the  same. 
Mr.  Dillon. —  Practically. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  merchandise  must  bear  the  burden  of  the 
state  salesmen  in  the  state  market  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  you  find  out  about  the  Paris  system 
that  you  think  would  be  unsuited  to  our  conditions  other  than  you 
have  already  described,  anything  further  ?  For  instance,  we  have 
a  tradition  in  this  country  that  private  parties  can  do  such  work 
under  our  system  of  government  more  economically  and  effectively 
than  a  government  can.  That  is,  our  economists  say  that  the 
Paree  departments  which  you  attempt  to  describe  might  be  carried 
on  at  a  much  less  expense  than  the  municipality  carries  it  on  by 
private  enterprise,  the  private  operations  conducted  usually  at 
half  the  expense  of  state  or  city  conduct  of  it.  What  is  your 
observation  as  to  that  theory?  Is  there  anything  in  it? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  the  observation  is  this.  That  in  many  of 
the  products  of  France  that  were  displayed  and  sold  in  the  market, 
I  traced  about  twenty  cents  of  the  consumer's  dollar  that  went  to 
distribution;  that  is,  about  20  cents  on  the  dollar  was  about  the 
cost  of  distribution. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Can  you  refer  us  to  some  particular  product  where 
that  demonstration  was  made? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  made  it  in  France  on  vegetables,  eggs  and 
poultry. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  was  in  Paris  ? 


36S 

Mr.  Dillon. —  In  Paris,  yes,  sir ;  and  I  found  practically  the 
same  thing  in  Leon  in  the  market  there,  and  in  the  Brussells 
market.  The  cost  there  seems  to  run  about  20  cents.  With  us, 
it  costs  about  G5. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  have  heard  that  statement  from  several  dif- 
ferent angles  and  different  sources,  that  same  statement,  that  it 
costs  us  about  65.  Can  you  give  us  a  concrete  example  that  will 
demonstrate  that  for  the  record  of  this  Committee  ?  We  have  not 
been  able  to  demonstrate  it  by  the  examination  of  witnesses  and 
it  has  occurred  to  me  that  we  have  not  been  able  to  demonstrate 
it  in  that  way  because  we  did  not  reach  the  right  sources. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Of  course,  your  difficulty  is  to  get  at  averages. 
In  some  cases  it  runs  more;  and  in  some  cases,  it  runs  less. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  but  we  ought  to  have  some  specific  instances. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Here  is  a  specific  instance.  Eggs  were  bought 
last  spring  in  the  Western  states  at  18  cents  to  20  cents  a  dozen; 
they  were  put  in  cold  storage  and  carried  during  the  summer. 
Now  they  went  into  cold  storage  on  an  average  about  22  cents  a 
dozen;  they  could  be  sold  at  a  nominal  profit  wholesale,  candled, 
ready  for  the  retailer  to-day  at  28.  The  wholesale  price  for  them 
is  37,  38 ;  I  don't  know  what  they  are  to-day,  and  the  retail  price 
of  those  eggs  throughout  the  city  varies  from  45  to  60  cents. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  is  that  what  is  meant  when  parties  engaged 
in  this  propaganda  and  who  are  said  to  be  studying  these  things 
assert  that  65  per  cent  of  the  consumer's  dollar  does  not  reach  the 
producer  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.—  I  mean  this,  and  the  consumer  pays  $1  for  eggs. 
Xow,  on  the  average,  the  distribution  on  the  average,  the  producer 
would  get  35  cents  out  of  $1,  and  the  distributor  would  get  65. 
It  would  cost  65  cents  for  the  distribution.  In  this  particular  case 
that  I  have  cited  it  costs  from  two  hundred  to  three  hundred  per 
cent  of  the  original  cost  of  the  eggs  for  the  distribution. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  we  had  a  concrete  example  of  that  yesterday 
and  I  think  it  appeared  from  that  demonstration  that  only  $408 
out  of  a  total  value  of  $3,000  went  to  pay  the  cost  of  distribution. 


366 

That  included  interest,  storage,  commissions  and  freight. 
if  I  was  stating  that  proposition,  as  I  understand  political 
economy,  I  should  have  said  that  it  showed  that  less  than  20  per 
cent  of  the  consumer's  dollar  went  for  distribution,  tracing  the 
carload  of  eggs  which  we  did  yesterday.  In  other  words,  if  a 
political  economist  were  stating  that  proposition,  he  would  have 
been  required  to  say  that  it  proved  and  demonstrated  on  that  car- 
load of  eggs  that  only  20  per  cent,  of  the  consumer's  dollar  was 
consumed  in  distribution.  Do  you  think  that  statement  of  a 
political  economist  would  be  wrong? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  In  that  particular  case  that  you  developed  yes- 
terday you  did  not  get  to  the  consumer  at  all. 

Mi\  Ward. —  Well,  we  got  to  Mrs.  Smith,  the  boarding  house 
keeper. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Oh,  excuse  me.  What  was  the  original  cost ;  what 
was  the  final  cost  to  the  consumer  ? 

Mr.  Ward. —  They  cost  Mrs.  Miller  42  cents  a  dozen  but  they 
had  gone  into  cold  storage  to  the  Decatur  Produce  Company  of 
Decatur,  Indiana,  at  22  cents  a  dozen. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  but  the  Decatur  Produce  Company  did  not 
produce  them. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  I  take  it,  that  Indiana  fresh  eggs  at  that 
period  would  cost  18  or  19  cents. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  so  the  producer  got  18  cents  out  of  the  42. 

Mr.  Ward. —  If  the  producer  had  stored  his  eggs  in  Decatur, 
Indiana,  he  would  have  gotten  this  same  market  that  this  consumer 
would,  have  paid  him;  it  didn't  make  any  difference  to  the  con- 
sumer whether  he  bought  those  eggs  of  Ellenberger  or  whether 
Ellenberger  had  received  them  at  current  market  prices  from  a 
producer  at  Decatur,  Indiana. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Of  course,  you  understand  I  assume  that  the 
cold  storage  facilities  we  have  are  not  available  to  the  producer. 

Mr.  Ward. —  There  are  cold  storage  facilities  to-day  in  almost 
every  city  of  ten  thousand  people.  We  have  met  dozens  of  poultry 


367 

men  who  have  shipped  from  eight  to  eighty  cases  and  put  them 
in  cold  storage.  You  will  find  those  producers'  eggs  in  cold  storage 
at  the  right  season  all  the  way  from  Jacksonville  to  Quebec. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  is  true,  you  will  find  it  in  many  locations. 
I  believe  there  is  cold  storage  in  every  town  of  ten  thousand  people 
in  the  State. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  what  we  want  to  get  clear  in  our  minds  is 
whether  the  statement  that  we  hear  frequently  made  that  only 
one-third  of  the  consumer's  dollar  gets  to  the  producer  refers  to 
a  situation  where  somebody  has  stored  and  waited  for  a  better 
market. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Not  necessarily. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  that  would  be  the  egg  situation. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  have  seen  apples  selling  on  the  farms  of  this 
State  for  $1.50  to  $2  per  barrel  and  retailing  in  the  market  here 
at  prices  ranging  from  $10  to  $20. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  caused  that  and  what  was  the  situation  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  there  are  a  good  many  factors  that  entered 
into  it.  Probably  the  most  important  is  that  there  is  no  very  good 
market  developed  in  the  city  of  New  York  for  New  York  State 
apples.  This  market  is  developed  for  Western  apples. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Who  developed  it? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  The  speculators  in  apples. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is,  you  think  they  have  educated  the  people  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  No;  they  go  into  the  West  and  they  put  up  money 
in  advance  for  apples  in  the  Northwest  under  a  contract  that  those 
apples  must  be  shipped  to  them  for  handling  and  sold  on  a  com- 
mission. In  those  cases  they  have  their  money  invested,  or  rather 
some  money  invested  in  the  apples  and  they  have  an  opportunity 
to  reach  a  good  profit  or  realize  a  good  profit  out  of  the  handling 
of  them  aside  from  the  interest  on  their  money,  and  it  is  for  the 
profit  in  the  handling  of  them  that  they  put  up  this  advance  more 
than  the  interest  on  their  money,  of  course.  Now,  their  money 
invested  in  that  fruit  carries  their  interest  in  that  fruit  and  their 


3G8 

interest  is  to  market  that  Western  product  in  this  State  and  in 
this  city  rather  than  the  local  fruits,  the  State  fruits,  and  by 
bringing  that  Western  fruit  in  here,  they  have  developed  a  market 
and  you  will  find  the  Western  apples  all  over  the  city  in  every 
little  fruit  stand  and  you  will  find  it  very  difficult  to  find  a  New 
York  State  apple. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Do  we  understand  these  Western  people  have 
helped  the  men  who  put  their  money  in  his  crop  by  pushing  their 
own  apples  by  advertising,  etc.,  and  by  packing  and  grading? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  They  have  done  something  of  that  kind.  They 
are  forced  to  it.  The  people  of  the  Northwest  are  unable  to  send 
a  second  grade  apple  here;  they  couldn't  get  enough  to  pay  the 
expense.  It  costs  about  GO  cents  a  box  for  freight  and  icing  and 
getting  it  down  here,  so  they  could  not  afford  to  send  a  second 
grade,  a  poor  grade,  at  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  where  they  are  getting  $10  a  barrel,  wouldn't 
you  think  the  second  grade  ought  to  bring  $7  or  $8  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Don't  make  any  mistake  that  the  grower  in  the 
Northwest  gets  $10  a  barrel.  He  hasn't  any  smoother  sailing 
than  the  Eastern  grower. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Wouldn't  you  think  the  Eastern  man  would  put 
some  of  his  money  into  the  second  grade  apples  and  sell  the  barrels 
say  at  $5  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  The  speculators  in  apples  are  not  particularly 
anxious  to  buy  second  grade.  They  do  buy  some  second  grade  up 
in  this  State.  In  the  better  orchards,  they  buy  the  second 
grades. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  to  one  not  versed  in  the  qualities  of  the 
apple,  we  had  the  general  idea  that  the  Western  apple  had  a  rather 
fancier  dress  on  than  the  simple  gown  that  nature  clothes  them 
with  in  New  York  State.  Is  there  anything  in  that? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  The  run  of  the  Western  apples  we  get  here  does 
run  better  than  ours,  because  we  bring  in  not  only  our  best  apples 
but  our  seconds  and  sometimes  thirds  and  fourths,  and  altogether 
the  appearance  is  not  as  good  as  the  one  single  grade  that  come?. 
from  the  Northwest  j  it  doesn't  appear  as  well. 


369 

Mr.  Ward. —  XOAV,  I  don't  want  you  to  take  it  that  these  ques- 
tions indicate  our  position.  I  am  simply  what  you  might  call 
the  devil's  advocate  for  this  Committee  and  I  take  the  contrary 
side  of  every  argument  in  order  to  bring  out  the  views  of  the  wit- 
ness. I  have  to  take  the  responsibility  of  being  wrong  all  the  time. 
K~ow,  could  any  system  of  marketing  that  the  State  might  super- 
vise impress  upon  the  ISTew  York  consumer  who  is  carried  away 
by  the  attractive  package  and  grade  and  appearance  and  thereby 
replace  in  this  market  the  Wayne  County  apple  instead  of  the 
Hood  River  apple  ?  That  is,  could  the  State  by  a  mere  market, 
or  the  city,  do  that  thing? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  sir;  I  feel  it  could. 
Mr.  Ward. —  In  what  way  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  The  Western  apple  is  assembled  by  the  growers 
and  packed  and  crated  not  by  the  owner  himself,  but  by  men 
selected  and  qualified  for  that  purpose  —  the  Growers'  Associa- 
tion. We  do  that  in  Niagara  county  in  a  few  cases,  but  our  plan 
in  devising  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets  was  to  go  over 
the  whole  State,  put  four  or  five  men  into  the  State  that  were 
qualified  for  the  work  to  organize  producers  into  associations  and 
to  provide  places  through  these  organizations  where  the  fanner 
could  assemble  his  product  and  employ  trained  men  to  pack  and 
crate  the  product  and  ship  it  in  carload  lots. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  understood  our  Department  of  Agriculture 
has  the  forces  of  institute  instructors  and  experts  who  AVC  were 
informed  Avere  engaged  more  or  less  to  the  extent  of  their  appro- 
priation in  that  very  work. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  They  have  done  nothing  of  this  kind  at  all.  They 
have  a  force  that  performs  an  educational  function,  but  they  do 
not  undertake  to  organize  and  set  up  a  regular  system  for  the 
marketing  of  products. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  find  the  Farm  Bureau  men  organizing  the 
dairymen  and  getting  them  in  a  compact  body. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  think  the  head  of  that  department  was  opposed 
to  the  organization  and  I  knOAV  he  has  been  opposed  to  possible 


370 

organization  in  the  work  of  distribution.     Some  of  the  individuals 
might  have  done  it  outside.     They  were  very  active  and  helpful. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Hasn't  that  got  a  connection  with  the  State 
Agricultural  Department,  the  extension  work  of  the  Agricultural 
Colleges  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  think  not ;  I  don't  think  there  is  any  connec- 
tion between  these  two.  I  don't  know  about  that.  My  idea  is 
that  while  the  State  has  taken  some  steps  in  the  direction  indi- 
cated, it  has  not  gone  far  enough ;  by  going  further  in  this  same 
direction,  some  conditions  can  be  remedied.  I  don't  understand 
that  the  Agricultural  Department  ever  attempted  the  work  I  am 
engaged  in  at  all,  with  the  exception  of  the  co-operative  bureau 
and  that  was  discontinued.  The  Farm  Bureau  is  beginning  to  co- 
operate in  this  work.  The  county  agents  are  developing  a  very 
useful  function.  My  idea  of  the  way  that  should  be  done  would 
be  a  sufficient  appropriation  for  my  department  for  me  to  send 
out  men  not  only  to  instruct  the  farmers  in  the  matter  of  market- 
ing, but  to  turn  in  and  help  them  organize  themselves;  go  right 
in  and  help  them. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Of  course,  the  cost  of  that  must  ultimately  be 
borne  by  the  consumer  and  producer. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes;  yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Ought  it  not  more  fairly  to  be  borne  by  those 
directly  interested  in  the  traffic?  I  might  not  want  any  of  those 
goods  and  yet  I  would  have  to  pay  my  share. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  I  don't  know  of  any  man,  woman  or  child 
in  this  State  who  is  not  interested  in  the  consumption  of  food. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  here  is  a  particular  kind  of  food.  I  might 
have  an  apple  range  out  in  the  Hood  River  and  live  in  New  York 
City  and  I  might  say,  why  should  I  pay  to  educate  the  man  on 
Lexington  avenue  that  he  ought  to  buy  -New  York  State  apples; 
why  shouldn't  I  say  that  ought  to  be  left  to  the  man  selling  New 
York  State  apples  as  his  individual  burden  ?  You  see,  as  I  told 
you  before,  I  am  the  devil's  advocate  here. 


371 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  of  course,  that  is  all  right  from  a  very  cir- 
cumscribed view  of  the  situation. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  most  taxpayers'  view  is  circumscribed  by 
their  pocketbook. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  is  a  very  circumscribed  view.  If  we  ap- 
plied that  principle  to  all  of  our  affairs  we  would  get  nowhere  as 
a  community  or  a  State. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  mean,  if  a  man  growing  New  York  State 
apples  wants  to  get  his  apples  into  the  New  York  market  your 
proposition  is  that  the  State  should  do  it  for  him  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  The  individual  is  helpless  in  the  matter;  he  can- 
not do  it  alone.  I  will  grant  you  that  it  would  be  very  proper 
and  a  very  good  thing  for  the  individual  apple  growers  of  this 
State  to  go  right  on  and  perfect  this  organization  for  themselves 
and  bear  the  expense  of  it.  They  could  afford  to  do  it,  but  the 
farmer  is  occupied  by  the  affairs  of  his  farm  and  his  mind  has 
been  running  along  production  and  the  State  has  directed  him 
along  that  line  of  production.  It  has  spent  very  large  sums  to 
instruct  and  encourage  the  farmer  on  an  increased  production  and 
during  all  that  time  up  to  the  present  year  he  has  always  produced 
what  he  could  not  sell  at  a  profit.  So  growing  out  of  that  experi- 
ence, we  conclude  that  the  State,  while  its  educational  work  was 
good,  had  not  gone  far  enough.  The  avowed  purpose  was  to  keep 
boys  and  girls  on  the  farm  by  making  the  farm  profitable  by  pro- 
ducing more  and  they  produced  so  much  that  the  farmer  gets  less 
out  of  a  bumper  crop  than  out  of  a  small  crop.  We  have  an  illus- 
tration of  that  to-day  in  the  potato  crop.  Incident  to  this  we 
might  be  able  to  show  that  oftentimes  the  bigger  the  crop,  as  a 
whole,  the  smaller  the  profit  to  the  producer. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  that  is  a  law  of  political  economy,  as  I  un- 
derstand it,  but  is  answered  by  the  proposition  that  the  benefit 
to  the  State  as  a  whole  overcomes  the  detriment  to  any  individual. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  generalizes  it.  We  need  food ;  we  must 
have  food  for  the  consumers  of  the  city.  This  is  a  problem  that 
is  of  greater  concern  to  the  people  of  the  city  than  it  is  to  the 
farmer  in  the  country,  because  the  fanner  can  adjust  himself  to 


372 

conditions  and  he  can  get  along  without  producing  any  particular 
line  of  goods  unless  he  is  getting  a  profit.  He  has  the  option  to 
drop  it,  but  the  consumer  must  have  food  all  the  time  and  unless 
the  farmer  is  encouraged  to  produce  large  and  abundant  crops, 
the  price  to  the  consumer  is  bound  to  be  high.  It  is  to  the  ulti- 
mate interest  to  the  State  that  production  be  carried  on  to  its  ut- 
most reasonable  limit.  In  this  city  we  are  consuming  between 
eight  hundred  million  and  a  billion  dollars'  worth  of  food  stuffs 
partially  consumed  here  and  up  and  down  the  coast.  Of  that,  not 
more  than  five  per  cent  is  grown  on  the  farms  of  this  State.  The 
tendency  is  here  to  discriminate  against  New  York  food  products 
in  favor  of  products  from  a  distance.  Fanners  just  outside  the 
limits  of  the  city  are  under  the  necessity  of  seeking  foreign  mar- 
kets, going  West  and  South  in  the  sale  of  fruit,  apples,  peaches, 
pears,  potatoes.  I  wouldn't  hold  that  discrimination  for  any  other 
purpose  than  following  the  line  of  greater  profit  for  the  man  that 
is  handling  it ;  he  finds  it  to  his  advantage  to  go  into  foreign  pro- 
duction fields  and  get  possession  of  the  goods  for  distribution,  for 
sale,  either  by  solicitation  without  advance,  and  usually  by  making 
advance  payments  and  sometimes  by  buying  for  speculation,  and 
that  brings  those  foreign  products  into  the  market  in  bulk  and 
puts  the  man  here  whose  personal  interest  is  to  handle  them  and 
put  them  on  the  market  to  develop  the  market  for  them. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  now  it  occurred  to  us  in  looking  it  over  that 
the  handling  and  distribution  of  food  supplies  of  all  kinds  here  in 
New  York  City  so  as  to  provide  a  constant  stream  to  the  party  that 
desired  it  was  remarkably  efficiently  organized  to  bring  about  that 
result.  That  is,  the  baker  knows  every  day  just  where  ho  can  get 
and  secure  a  frozen  egg  product  which  just  meets  his  requirement 
and  which  has  practically  the  stamp  of  the  Health  Department 
on  it  The  hotel  keeper  knows  just  what  man  will  be  at  his  door 
with  a  certain  grade  of  eggs  or  a  certain  brand  of  butter,  not  this 
week  or  next  week,  but  this  morning.  We  find  in  many  cities  of 
the  State  where  you  couldn't  get  a  dozen  of  the  required  brand  of 
eggs  to  save  one's  life.  Or  a  tub  of  a  certain  brand  of  butter  on 
certain  days;  but  here  in  New  York  it  seems  that  you  are  organ- 
ized to  distribute  this  food  every  day  and  every  minute  of  the 


373 

clay,  just  according  to  the  demand,  and  it  occurred  to  us  that  it 
was  a  remarkably  efficient  arrangement.  How  does  that  appeal  to 
you,  you  have  investigated  it  here.  Is  that  a  correct  idea  or  are 
we  wrong  in  our  conception  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  we  have  a  pretty  steady  supply  of  food  here 
of  one  kind  or  another.  That  comes  because  we  have  here  the  best 
market  in  the  world,  a  very  large  market.  We  have  a  great  many 
people  to  feed  here  and  they  are  pretty  good  feeders  and  are  will- 
ing to  pay  the  price  for  a  good  article  and  the  distribution  system 
is  developed  to  a  fine  art.  It  is  developed  so  fine  that  it  is  very- 
expensive. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  we  investigated  a  short  time  ago  and  found 
that  a  box  of  mixed  grape  fruit  cost  in  St.  Augustine  25  cents 
more  than  the  wholesale  price  in  New  York  City. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  very  frequently  happens.  I  can  tell  you 
about  an  instance.  I  was  interested  in  a  farm  with  my  brother 
at  Wralden  in  Orange  county  and  he  was  growing  garden  stuff  — 
sweet  corn,  beans  peas  and  all  that  kind,  quite  near  the  thrifty 
little  town  of  Walden  about  two  miles  away.  I  said,  why  don't 
you  take  this  clown  to  Walden  and  sell  it  ?  He  said,  I  cannot  get 
enough  out  of  it  to  pay  for  picking  and  carrying  it  down  there. 
Then  he  told  me,  which  investigation  proved  correct,  this  time  of 
year  this  stuff  is  shipped  into  New  York  and  they  get  over-bur- 
dened more  than  they  can  use;  peddlers  go  there  and  buy  it  and 
ship  it  to  Newburgh  by  boat  and  run  it  out  to  Walden  12  miles 
in  a  wagon  and  they  buy  it  so  cheap  in  New  York  that  they  can 
pay  for  the  transportation  and  cartage  out  here  and  sell  it  in  Wal- 
den cheaper  than  he  can  afford  to  pick  it  out  of  the  farm  after  it 
is  grown  and  take  it  down  and  sell  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  It  is  said  that  Hood  River  apples  are  quoted  in 
New  York  50  cents  a  box  cheaper  from  the  wholesalers  here  than 
they  are  quoted  at  Hood  River. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  we  have  that  all  over.  I  was  out  on  Long 
Island  a  couple  of  years  ago.  We  paid  more  money  for  the  pro- 
duce that  we  got  out  there  right  off  the  farm  than  we  would  have 
paid  for  the  same  things  here  in  the  city,  the  same  grades  of  goods. 


374 

The  farmer  sells  very  little  at  retail.  He  depends  on  his  whole- 
sale market  and  it  isn't  worth  his  while,  he  figures,  to  bother 
with  an  occasional  sale,  so  he  puts  on  the  city's  prices. 

When  there  is  a  surplus  here  in  any  particular  product,  the 
price  is  very  low  to  the  producer,  but  it  seldom  gets  any  lower 
to  the  consumer.  There  is  no  attempt  to  increase  consumption 
when  there  is  a  surplus;  there  seems  to  be  a  deliberate  purpose 
not  to  do  it,  I  have  seen  cauliflower,  cabbages,  berries  sell  here 
at  prices  that  wouldn't  pay  the  cost  of  the  freight  and  of  the  pack- 
age on  the  wholesale  market,  and  when  you  go  to  the  retail  mar- 
kets, the  price  to  the  family  is  just  as  high,  almost,  as  when  there 
is  a  scarcity.  I  wouldn't  say  it  holds  out  in  every  case,  but  I  say 
it  is  so  prevalent  that  it  is  a  custom  in  general. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  would  like  to  follow  that  out.  Two  years 
ago  we  had  a  bumper  crop  of  wheat,  two  or  three  years  ago,  and 
no  great  extra  demand  and  wheat  and  flour  and  bread  we  under- 
stood went  down  to  the  consumer  here  in  the  city. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  JSTo,  bread  did  not  go  down. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  take  the  case  of  potatoes.  Last  year  we  had 
a  plentiful  crop.  What  did  potatoes  sell  for  to  consumers  here, 
do  you  remember  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  They  sold  at  about  75  or  80  cents  a  bushel. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Now,  we  have  this  short  crop  in  the  United  States, 
many  millions  of  bushels,  and  the  price  has  doubled  to  the  con- 
sumer, has  it  not  ? 

Mr.  Dillon.— Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  that  they  did  in  a  way,  in  that  case  the  con- 
sumer got  the  advantage  of  the  bumper  crop  which  was  produced 
last  year. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  they  got  some  advantage. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And  then,  the  rule  seems  to  work  out  this  way; 
that  in  temporary  surpluses,  where  the  surplus  is  temporary  only 
over  night,  or  on  one  day,  and  the  surpluses  do  not  continue  long 
enough  to  affect  the  market,  that  the  consumer  gets  no  benefit  from 


375 

such  temporary  surpluses,  but  where  the  surplus  is  such  as  to  affect 
the  national  price,  your  consumer  does  get  the  benefit  of  it. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  'Oh,  when  you  get  such  a  situation  as  we  have  in 
potatoes  to-day,  that  is  so,  but  I  had  the  milk  situation  in  mind. 
When  the  milk  is  flush  they  charge  just  the  same  for  it  as  when  it 
is  short  in  the  winter.  The  price  should  change. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  it  would  not  make  any  difference  to  the  con- 
sumer in  the  end,  would  it,  if  the  prices  were  adjusted  on  the  same 
average  as  now,  if  you  lowered  them  in  the  summer,  and  raised 
them  in  the  winter  ?  Ultimately,  his  year's  milk  would  cost  him 
the  same,  would  it  not  ?  And  a  great  many  things  of  that  nature 
have  a  stable  price  average  through  the  year.  Hennery  men  make 
such  contracts,  and  farmers  make  them  for  their  butter  to  their 
customers  in  the  town.  They  all  try  to  stabilize  their  prices  if 
they  can.  Why  is  it  not  advantageous  to  the  milk  man  to  stabilize 
his  prices  ?  As  I  told  you,  I  am  the  devil's  own  advocate  and  op- 
pose every  argument. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  That  is  all  right,  there  is  a  small  advantage  that 
comes  to  a  producer  from  regulating  his  production  to  meet  a  cer- 
tain demand,  but  I  am  not  discussing  an  individual  trade  of  that 
kind,  but  the  general  market.  I  did  say  I  had  milk  in  mind  at 
the  beginning. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Yesterday  we  had  books  of  an  egg  dealer  in  here, 
who  had  been  in  the  egg  business  since  1912,  and  we  found  on  his 
books  yesterday  many  sales  of  eggs  in  February,  1915,  for  18,  19 
and  20  cents  a  dozen,  here  in  the  city.  There  was  a  tremendous 
slump  in  the  egg  business  at  that  season,  occasioned  by  the  early 
season  Western  fresh  eggs  coming  into  the  market,  and  his  books 
showed  repeated  sales  of  5  cases,  2  cases,  1  case,  to  storekeepers, 
etc.,  up  along  the  street,  as  low  as  12  cents.  Now,  referring  to 
your  statement  that  the  people  never  get  the  advantage  of  a  sur- 
plus, there  was  apparently  a  surplus  of  eggs  in  1915,  and  it  seems 
that  it  had  the  advantage  of  that  surplus,  in  getting  candled  eggs 
for  12  and  15  cents  a  dozen  at  the  store  counters. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Without  verifying  that  statement,  I  would  not 
want  to  accept  it. 


376 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  wish  you  would  verify  it,  of  course.  We  have 
to  take  their  books  and  they  may  not  be  right.  We  can  get  them 
and  you  can  check  them  up  and  see  how  it  will  bear  out  their  ar- 
gument. As  I  remember,  they  were  charging  40  and  42  cents  a 
dozen  over  the  counters.  Allen  &  Gerber's  books  show  that  the 
storekeepers  were  buying  them  for  from  12  to  20  cents.  Of  course, 
we  have  not  looked  upon  the  storekeeper  as  the  offender.  He  is 
in  the  paper  nowadays,  asserting  that  he  is  right,  and  that  the  rob- 
ber is  the  middle  man ;  but  in  that  case,  judging  from  these  books, 
the  wholesaler  or  middle  man  here  was  not  to  blame.  It  cannot 
be  the  jobber  alone  that  stores  the  eggs.  All  Buffalo  cold  storage 
houses  take  Western  eggs  and  then  they  send  men  down  through 
the  State  in  June  and  July  offering  to  sell  any  of  us  1,000  or 
10,000  cases  of  eggs,  and  take  our  note  in  a  ten  per  cent,  payment, 
and  let  everybody  in  on  the  speculation.  That  is  not  confined  to 
New  York  City.  We  have  known  farmers  up  the  State  to  carry 
several  thousand  dozens  of  eggs  through  the  season,  and  then  those 
warehouse  receipts  are  sold  when  they  can  get  a  profit  on  them. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Exactly. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And,  if  the  market  goes  wrong,  you  may  have  to 
sell  that  warehouse  receipt  for  a  cent  or  two  the  dozen  less  than 
you  paid  for  it. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  You  would  have  to  take  a  chance. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But,  that  would  show  that  the  consumer,  even  if 
he  paid  40  cents  over  the  counter  to  the  storekeeper,  did  get  some 
benefit  from  that  flush  of  eggs  in  1915. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  of  course,  there  are  limitations  to  the  avarice 
of  the  merchants.  The  fault  in  the  distributing  system  here  in  the 
city  of  ]STew  York  is  not  so  much  due  to  any  one  man  as  it  is  to 
the  whole  system.  It  is  all  wrong,  and  the  next  man  that  goes  into 
the  sale  of  eggs,  butter,  cheese,  apples,  and  practically  any  of  those 
products,  he  has  got 'to  conform  to  the  rules  of  the  system  or  go  out 
of  husiness.  The  important  rule  of  the  system  is  to  make  the  traf- 
fic pay  all  it  will  bear,  to  make  just  as  little  a  return  as  possible 
to  the  producer,  and  charge  the  consumer  all  he  can  get.  Some 
men  think  if  you  can  do  those  things  honestly  so  much  the  better, 


377 

but  I  think  the  custom  has  grown  up  in  this  trade  so  that  a  good 
many  men  doing  it  would  rather  make  the  same  amount  of  money 
through  trickery  than  in  a  legitimate  way.  The  curse  of  the  whole 
cold  storage  egg  proposition  in  this  town  has  been  from  the  time 
that  the  eggs  were  first  stored  and  held  for  consumption,  that  in- 
stead of  putting  them  on  the  market  and  selling  them  to  the  people 
at  a  reasonable  profit  at  the  opening  of  the  season,  they  hold  them 
as  long  as  they  can  and  then  try  to  sell  them  under  the  disguise  of 
fresh  laid  eggs. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  here  is  a  suggestion  about  putting  storage 
eggs  on  the  market  at  the  opening  of  the  season.  Mr.  Ehlenberger, 
who  was  one  of  the  witnesses  yesterday,  testified  that  he  could  not 
very  well  do  that,  because  he  is  under  contract  to  furnish  a  given 
amount  of  eggs  to  hotels  and  restaurants  every  day  in  the  year; 
that  he  could  not  put  his  eggs  on  the  market  at  the  beginning  of 
the  season  and  keep  in  business.  Then  it  was  disclosed  that 
Ehlenberger  had  a  contract  with  another  jobber  to  furnish  him, 
Ehlenberger,  with  a  certain  number  of  cases  every  day  in  the  year, 
so  it  would  appear  that  these  men  could  not  do  as  you  wish,  and 
throw  open  their  warehouses  and  put  their  eggs  on  the  market  the 
first  of  October.  They  have  to  hold  them  for  the  convenience  of 
their  trade. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Well,  that  seems  all  right.  That  is  a  good 
function. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Still,  is  not  every  stock  "that  is  laid  in,  put  in  for 
the  regular  trade  that  has  been  created,  or  in  the  hopes  of  creat- 
ing one? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Yes,  I  think  they  are,  but  I  think  we  could  im- 
prove that  system  by  increasing  the  amount  of  cold  storage  space, 
and  by  encouraging  saving  that  space  for  the  larger  number  of 
small  holders  to  put  them  in  storage  and  hold  them  for  the  trade. 
The  cold  storage  space  has  not  increased  so  far  as  it  should  have. 
There  are  times  when  there  is  lots  of  cold  storage  space,  and  there 
are  times  when  you  cannot  get  a  bit  of  space.  The  only  way  we 
can  get  increased  storage  space  is  by  building  more  storage  plants. 
My  solution  of  this  whole  distributing  problem  is  to  provide  and 


378 

equip  cold  storage  facilities  at  terminal  markets  where  goods  can 
be  assembled  in  this  town  and  sold  in  the  open. 

Mr.  Ward.—  By  the  State  ? 
Mr.  Dillon. —  By  the  State. 
Mr.  Ward. —  Or  by  the  city  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  do  not  care  whether  it  is  the  State  or  city.  I 
would  have  a  preference  for  the  State  doing  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  advantage  could  you  show  to  the  taxpayer 
in  St.  Lawrence  county  if  the  State  did  it  ? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  I  could  show  him  a  ready  market  for  his  hay,  for 
his  milk,  for  his  cheese,  and  I  could  show  him  an  advance  over  any 
price  that  he  has  ever  received  for  it  before,  and  I  could  assure 
him  an  honest  return. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Regardless  of  the  supply? 

Mr.  Dillon. —  Regardless  of  the  supply,  yes.  The  men  who  are 
permitted  to  operate  and  deal  in  the  Paris  wholesale  market  must 
be  men  of  unblemished  record.  Any  man  that  has  been  convicted 
of  any  dishonesty  or  crime  in  connection  with  food  or  anything 
else  would  not  be  permitted  to  operate  in  that  market  at  all.  The 
Prefect  of  Police  has  the  enforcement  of  this  law  and  the  duties  of 
licensing  and  the  control  of  men  who  operate,  and  any  man  that 
operates  must  be  approved  by  the  State  and  furnish  a  $100,000 
bond.  This  Paris  law  covers  everybody  who  operates  in  that  mar- 
ket. We  have  men  operating  in  this  market  to-day  who  have  been 
convicted  of  crime,  and  who  have  paid  fines  as  high  as  $12,000  in 
single  instances.  Other  men  have  been  sentenced  to  the  peniten- 
tiary, and  all  those  men  are  back  in  the  business  as  they  were  be- 
fore they  were  convicted  or  confessed.  The  men  who  swindled  the 
United  States  Government  by  misbranding  a  large  purchase  of  but- 
ter were  suspended  from  the  Butter  and  Egg  Exchange,  and  that 
ended  it.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  they  are  selling  butter  to  the  public 
institutions  to-day,  the  same  concerns  under  practically  the  same 
inspection.  The  men  who  w^re  convicted  of  swindling  the  car- 
riers by  false  claims  of  rebate,  pleaded  guilty  in  the  United  States 


379 

Court,  and  all  those  people  are  still  a  part  of  the  apparatus ;  prom- 
inent and  eminent  men  in  the  trade. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  should  hate  to  believe  that,  but  you  probably 
know  better  than  I  do.  There  must  be  a  decent  side  of  it,  too, 
that  is,  of  a  different  type  of  man. 

Mr.  Dillon. —  There  are  square,  honest  fellows  in  the  trade,  but 
there  is  a  system  in  the  trade  that  makes  it  impossible  for  a  man 
to  stay  in  it  and  stay  honest.  An  honest  man  would  be  imposed 
upon  by  the  competition,  and  besides  that  there  is  a  sort  of  inter- 
ested relationship  between  the  cold  storage  interests,  the  dealers' 
interest,  and  the  banking  interest  that  would  drive  him  out  of  bus- 
iness. The  dealers  that  operate  in  foods  have  connections  with  the 
cold  storage  concerns,  and  they  are  sometimes  on  the  Board  of 
Directors  and  stockholders  in  the  banks. 

They  are  able  to  borrow  money  from  80  to  100  per  cent,  at 
times,  on  the  cost  of  the  goods,  as  they  put  them  in  cold  storage, 
from  these  connections.  You  take  a  man  who  goes  into  the  busi- 
ness without  those  connections  and  undertakes  to  play  the  market 
on  the  square,  and  he  will  find  it  difficult  to  get  space  in  the  cold 
storage  houses,  and  very  difficult  to  get  a  loan  on  his  goods  from 
the  bank.  So  that  the  man  that  makes  himself  unpopular  through 
any  fantastic  notions  of  honesty  and  equity  in  his  dealings  is  put 
out  of  business  or  made  uncomfortable  in  it.  The  real  price  paid 
for  produce  never  gets  into  the  market  reports.  The  dealers  testi- 
fied under  oath  last  summer  that  no  dealer  could  pay  a  premium 
on  goods  shipped  to  this  market  unless  he  was  in  a  position  to 
control  the  man  that  published  the  prices  current.  That  has  been 
done  in  this  market  as  long  as  I  can  remember.  It  is  not  the  job- 
ber that  fools  the  retailer ;  the  retailer  knows  that  the  storage  eggs 
are  not  fresh  when  he  buys  them.  The  people  prefer  our  State 
eggs  and  State  butter,  but  our  butter  is  quoted  less  than  Western 
butter,  and  that  method  of  quoting  has  cost  our  farmers  and  our 
dairy  interests  in  this  State  millions  of  dollars,  and  it  is  all  done 
through  that  miserable  quotation  sheet  known  as  Urner  U-Barry 
quotation. 

Milk  dealers  in  this  town  have  organized  interests  and  almost 
exclusive  agency  for  the  distribution  of  milk;  a  system  of  house 


380 

to  house  delivery  for  what  we  call  the  better  class  of  trade,  and 
that  system  has  been  imposed  not  only  on  the  people  that  are 
abundantly  able  to  pay,  but  on  people  living  adjacent  to  the  same 
territory  that  would  rather  have  it  a  little  cheaper  and  would  be 
glad  to  get  it  for  less,  and  do  not  require  the  same  refinement  of 
service;  and  we  have  in  this  town,  in  every  corner  of  the  city, 
butcher  shops,  grocers,  delicatessen  stores,  well  equipped  for  han- 
dling of  milk.  They  tell  me  they  Avould  be  glad  to  distribute  milk 
in  this  city  for  one  cent  a  quart,  to  their  customers.  On  the  first 
of  April  we  can  pay  the  farmers  45  cents  a  hundred  more  than 
he  received  last  year,  and  still  deliver  the  milk  to  those  butcher 
shops,  grocers,  etc.,  in  every  part  of  the  city,  for  distribution  to 
the  family  for  8  cents  a  quart.  I  can  save  the  people  of  this  city 
$50,000  a  day  by  doing  the  milk  business,  or  $18,000,000  a  year. 
It  would  be  better  to  get  private  capital,  but  if  I  cannot  get  private 
capital,  the  State  should  furnish  me  the  money  to  do  it.  Of  course, 
I  could  not  do  all  the  milk  business,  but  I  could  do  enough  to  keep 
the  price  down.  I  would  have  the  State  buy  the  present  plants  of 
the  big  companies.  The  milk  companies  here  do  not  comply  with 
the  health  laws.  Ai  monopoly  would  be  much  of  an  improvement 
on  our  present  system,  but  I  can  do  better  if  the  State  will  aid  me 
to  sell  milk  by  State  competition.  The  State  would  then  buy  milk 
and  sell  milk,  and  that  would  regulate  the  price. 

GEORGE  HILDEBRAND,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
I  live  at  Milton,  Ulster  County,  ~N.  Y.    I  am  Deputy  Commis- 
sioner of  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets,  and  have  been 
since  February,  1916.     Before  that  I  was  in  the  fruit  business  in 
this  State,  West  Virginia,  and  in  the  West. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  want  to  get  on  the  record  what  your  connec- 
tion with  those  things  have  been.  What  were  you  doing  in  the 
fruit  business  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  I  have  been  operating  and  managing- 
growers'  exchanges  and  associations,  co-operative  exchanges.  I 
am  27  years  old. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  long  have  you  been  in  that  business  ? 
Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Nine  years. 


381 

Mr.  Ward. —  Where  did  you  first  become  connected  with  that 
work  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  In  Minnesota.  I  was  born  and  brought  up 
in  the  atmosphere  of  co-operation. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And,  I  suppose,  you  have  been  in  the  State  col- 
leges there  to  study  that  work  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  No.  I  got  my  first  experience  in  connec- 
tion with  co-operative  societies  when  I  came  into  New  York.  I 
had  lived  in  the  air  of  co-operation  and  fanners'  exchanges,  and 
the  like  of  that  in  our  State,  and  in  Wisconsin,  \uth  fruits  and 
vegetables.  There  are  co-operative  associations  there  who  deal  in 
potatoes,  onions  and  cabbages. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  you  observe  how  they  were  organized  and 
worked  there? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Oh,  yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  During  what  period  did  that  observation  cover  in 
years  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand.— Well,  1910,  1912. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  your  observation  relate  to ;  what  specific 
society  or  societies ;  what  did  they  call  them  ?  How  were  they  or- 
ganized, and  who  managed  them  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Well,  now  understand  me,  that  the  first  co- 
operative society  that  I  was  directly  connected  with  was  the  Hud- 
son River  Fruit  Exchange  at  Milton,  or  at  Ulster  and  Orange 
counties. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  we  are  striving  to  get  at  is  some  informa- 
tion as  to  how  they  worked  out  there,  and  I  take  it  from  your 
statement  that  you  have  been  brought  up  in  an  atmosphere  of 
co-operation. 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  You  are  quite  right. 

Mr.  Ward. —  And  you  would  come  in  contact  with  the  matter, 
we  understand,  so  what  did  you  see  and  learn  about  it  that  you 
could  tell  us? 


382 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Well,  the  fundamental  principles,  getting 
together. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  know,  -but  what  did  you  actually  see  ?  Who 
organized  ?  Where  was  it  ?  What  did  they  handle  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Well,  now,  this  is  in  the  general  way.  -  Is 
it  the  names  ? 

Mr.  Ward. —  Yes,  and  how  they  were  formed.  What  did  they 
call  them  ?  What  did  they  deal  in  ?  How  did  they  deal  ?  We  do 
not  know,  but  as  you  say  you  have  been  brought  up  in  it,  you  can 
tell  us  so  that  we  can  get  it  on  the  record  how  this  co-operative 
idea  is  actually  worked  out  there. 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Well,  I  am  not  able  to  give  you  the  names 
of  such  organizations. 

Mr.  Ward. — •  Did  you  become  familiar  enough  with  any  of  them 
so  that  you  know  what  work  they  were  really  doing  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand.— Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Tell  us  about  that  one,  or  one  of  those. 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Well,  that  again  is  a  hard  question.  It  is 
a  matter  of  record  of  any  organization  of  such  a  mind.  To  tell 
you  specifically  what  they  have  done  or  accomplished  is  hard. 
That  of  course  I  have  gained  by  experience. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  we  want  that  experience.  What  was  your 
connection  with  co-operative  societies  ? 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  I  started  in  my  home  town  in  Southern 
Minnesota;  bought  and  sold  butter,  eggs  and  poultry  from  my 
own  account,  as  a  dealer.  I  collected  it  and  sold  it.  I  lived  about 
25  miles  south  and  east  of  Albert  Lea  at  Lowell,  Minnesota.  I 
used  to  go  up  in  the  northern  part  of  the  State  and  buy  supplies. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then,  you  were  what  we  call  a  middle  man. 

Mr.  Hildebrand. —  Yes,  sir.  I  used  to  sell  them  to  collectors 
who  shipped  them  East,  and  then  I  shipped  to  Chicago  and  New 
York.  About  all  I  know  about  what  happened  to  that  stuff  at 
N"ew  York  is  what  I  have  heard.  I  did  not  have  any  experience 


383 

with  the  New  York  end  of  it.  I  used  to  pick  this  stuff  up  from 
the  farmers  and  paid  them  cash  for  it,  and  sold  it  to  the  collec- 
tors. Then  I  quit  that  and  went  to  Ehinelander,  Wisconsin, 
where  I  managed  a  fruit  and  produce  commission  business,  and  I 
was  there  until  I  was  hired  to  come  East  and  operate  the  newly 
organized  Hudson  Eiver  Fruit  Exchange  at  Milton.  I  helped  the 
farmers  get  oats  wholesale.  I  found  that  we  should  never  make 
a  long  standing  contract  to  deliver  anything  for  many  reasons, 
market  fluctuations  being  the  chief  reason.  I  am  speaking  about 
the  Hudson  Eiver  outfit  particularly.  Of  course,  the  cannery  men 
and  sauerkraut  men  have  got  to  have  a  long  standing  contract,  be- 
cause they  have  to  know  in  advance  how  much  the  product  is  going 
to  cost  so  that  they  can  make  sales  contracts. 

The  co-operative  idea,  does  not  cure  all  the  natural  ills  that 
flesh  is  heir  to.  Human  nature  is  still  infirm,  and  it  is  hard  to 
hold  the  fruit  man  to  contracts. 

FRED  L.  JELLIFFE,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 

I  live  in  Jersey  City,  and  am  in  the  produce  commission  busi- 
ness at  284  Washington  Street  in  New  York  City.  We  receive 
produce  on  commission  from  different  parts  of  the  country.  We 
get  a  number  of  shipments  from  the  Department  of  Foods  and 
Markets  of  New  York  State,  and  from  other  different  shippers  in 
other  States.  I  have  been  in  the  business  since  1884.  We  handle 
all  kinds  of  produce,  live  stock,  cattle,  sheep,  etc.  A  large  part 
of  our  business  is  live  stock.  The  Western  packers  do  not  handle 
the  great  bulk  of  the  New  York  State  produce.  There  are  several 
smaller  slaughter  houses  who  buy,  but  the  Western  packers,  Swift 
&  Co.,  Sulzberger,  Morris  &  Co.,  go  to  the  New  York  terminals 
and  buy  also.  The  local  slaughter  houses  get  the  bulk  of  it.  I 
have  seen  the  time  when  the  big  packers  would  take  the  bulk  of  it, 
and  I  have  seen  the  time  when  they  would  not  buy  at  all.  Each 
one  has  an  individual  buyer.  They  do  not  all  pay  the  same  prices. 
The  price  will  vary  between  different  ones  on  the  same  day,  be- 
tween Nelson  Morris,  Swift  and  Sulzberger.  I  have  seen  the 
United  Dressed  Eeef  buyer  pay  10  cents  a  hundred  more  than 
Swift's  man  would. 


384 

Mr.  Ward. —  Don't  the  food  trust  sec  to  it  that  that  does  not 
happen  ? 

Mr.  Jelliffe. —  That  one  buyer  would  not  pay  more  than  the 
other  ? 

Mr.  Ward.— Yes. 
Mr.  Jelliffe.—  No. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Don't  you  think  there  is  a  food  trust  in  this  beef 
business  ? 

Mr.  Jelliffe.— No. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Are  you  not  connected  with  the  Bureau  of  Foods 
and  Markets? 

Mr.  Jelliffe. —  I  handle  their  goods ;  but  there  is  no  food  trust 
with  the  market  up  there. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Perhaps  the  trust  is  all  in  the  selling  and  not  in 
the  buying? 

Mr.  Jelliffe. —  No,  there  is  no  trust  in  that,  either. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  won't  help  me  then  to  build  up  our  conten- 
tion. You  seem  to  be  embarrassed  by  the  facts. 

Mr.  Jelliffe. —  No.  I  handle  other  products  besides  beef  prod- 
ucts,— eggs,  butter,  poultry,  apples,  etc.  I  do  not  buy  any  of  this 
stuff,  but  act  entirely  as  an  agent, 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  did  you  come  to  make  an  arrangement  to 
act  as  commission  merchant  for  the  Department  of  Foods  and 
Markets  ? 

Mr.  Jelliffe. —  They  came  to  us  and  asked  us  to  handle  their 
goods.  We  have  store  houses.  We  aim  to  dispose  of  goods  as  soon 
as  possible  after  we  get  them.  We  try  immediately  to  dispose  of 
them  some  way.  Our  arrangement  with  the  Department  of  Foods 
and  Markets  is  that  we  handle  all  goods  consigned  to  them  at  5 
per  cent,  commission,  the  same  as  we  do  for  everybody  else*  Any- 
thing that  is  consigned  to  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets 
comes  right  to  us.  We  are  not  jobbers.  We  are  not  responsible 
for  compliance  with  the  branding  law  on  cases  of  eggs.  We  do 


385 

not  try  to  stamp  "cold  storage"  on  each  egg.     We  handle  the  eggs 
for  the  Department.     We  have  no  cold  storage. 

MALTBY  B.  JELLIFFE,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified: 

I  am  the  son  of  the  last  witness,  and  in  the  business  with  him. 
The  Department  sends  eggs  down  to  us  to  be  sold.  The  truckmen 
bring  the  stuff  to  our  place.  They  sent  a  hundred  cases  of  storage 
eggs,  and  we  sold  them,  some  for  35,  some  for  33,  some  for  31, 
some  for  30  cents.  We  remit  the  proceeds  of  these  sales  to  the  De- 
partment of  Poods  and  Markets. 

I  do  not  see  how7  the  State  could  maintain  a  market  here,  in- 
tending to  get  the  highest  possible  price  for  the  product  sent  to  it, 
and  at  the  same  time  conduct  the  market  for  the  benefit  of  the 
consumer.  I  do  not  think  that  could  be  successfully  done.  A 
State  department  would  not  work  here  to  get  the  lowest  price  for 
the  consumer,  and  the  highest  price  for  the  producer  up  the  State. 
You  cannot  successfully  be  on  both  sides  of  that  proposition.  We 
deduct  from  the  price  of  eggs  we  sell  five  per  cent,  commission  and 
transportation  charges.  J\o  part  of  that  five  per  cent,  commission 
is  refunded  to  the  Bureau.  We  sell  different  kinds  of  things  for 
Hildebrand  and  Dillon;  apples,  potatoes,  all  kinds  of  produce. 
We  sell  those  goods  the  same  way  we  sell  our  other  goods.  Men 
come  in  to  us  to  buy.  We  had  a  carload  of  potatoes  in  August  or 
September  that  was  consigned  to  the  Department  of  Foods  and 
Markets,  from  Maryland.  I  do  not  remember  the  price,  or  how 
much  we  sold  them  for.  The  Department  just  endorses  the  bill 
of  lading  over  to  us.  Mr.  Hildebrand  did  it.  We  get  apples 
nearly  every  day.  Yesterday  there  were  several  different  lots. 
The  largest  lot  came  from  Trumansburg, —  109  barrels,  I  think. 
We  sold  them  to  different  people.  The  buyers  came  around  to 
our  place  looking  for  them.  Mr.  Hildebrand  of  the  Department 
of  Foods  and  Markets  simply  endorsed  the  bill  of  lading  over  to 
us  and  we  got  the  goods  from  Pier  31,  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad, — 
one  car  of  109  barrels.  The  bill  of  lading  was  not  turned  over  to 
us  until  the  car  was  ready  for  delivery,  so  that  we  did  not  know  in 
advance  from  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets  that  such  a 
car  was  on  the  way.  Our  truckmen  got  delivery  from  the  Rail- 
13 


386 

way  Company  and  brought  them  down  to  our  sales  room.  I  did 
not  take  part  in  the  sales ;  one  of  our  salesmen  did  it.  I  have  not 
got  the  price  we  realized,  nor  the  grade.  We  have  already  ren- 
dered a  statement  of  those  sales  to  the  Department  of  Foods  and 
Markets,  or  it  will  be  done  this  afternoon.  We  have  the  blanks 
in  our  place  of  business,  furnished  us  by  the  Department  of  Foods 
and  Markets,  and  after  we  have  sold  the  goods  we  make  out  the 
statement  on  the  blank  as  if  it  was  sold  by  the  Department.  Our 
name  does  not  appear  on  the  blank  at  all.  This  carload  of  apples 
came  from  the  Lehigh  Valley  Pier,  direct  to  our  store,  and  nobody 
connected  with  the  Department  of  Foods  and  Markets,  so  far  as 
I  know,  ever  saw  the  car  of  apples,  or  handled  them.  We  sold 
these  in  exactly  the  same  way  we  sell  any  other  goods  shipped  to 
us,  and  charged  the  same  price,  and  we  pay  no  part  of  the  com- 
mission that  we  charge  to  the  State  or  anyone  else. 

I  will  give  you  a  copy  of  the  statement  on  this  car  which  we  sent 
to  Hildebrand. 

The  following  is  a  copy  of  the  statement  handed  the  Committee 
by  Jelliife,  Wright  &  Company: 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

DEPARTMENT  OF  FOODS  AND  MARKETS 

202-204  Franklin  Street, 

New  York  City 

Received  12-7-16  Dept.  Lot  No.  2829  Auctioneer's  Lot  No.   1016 

Account  Sales  of  Car 

Sold  for  Account  of  Mr.  C.  C.  Morrow       P.  0.  Address,  Trumansburg,  N.  Y. 


00 

h 
|i 

Sale  of  car  L.  V.  5834 
containing  apples  and  cabbage 
itemized  on  other  side 

423  50 

f  s 
g- 

DEDUCTIONS  : 
Fvnrps*          Freight                                                .    47   12 

•s<3 

So 

68  30 

<~-^ 

9 
5   d 
a 

INSPECTION 
NET  RETURNS 

355  20 

387 

(Other  side  of  statement.) 

5  bbls.  ungraded  Russets,  @   $2 . 50  $12 . 50 

17  No.  1  Baldwins  4 . 00  68 . 00 

4  No.  2  Spys  3.25  13.00 

5  Folleywater    3 . 50  17 . 50 

1  No.  1  Spys  3.50  3.50 

1  No.  2  Folleywater 2 . 50 

2  No.  2  Tallman  Sweets 2 . 50         5 . 00 

1  No.  1  Pound  Sweets 3 . 50 

1  No.  1  Pound  Sweets  2 . 50 

3  No.  1  Baldwins    4 . 00       12 . 00 

1   ungraded  Baldwin    2 . 50 

1  No.  2  Spys   2.50 

13  ungraded  Greenings  3 . 25       42 . 25 

1  Wagoners    4 . 00 

3  No.   1  Greenings    ' 4.00       12.00 

2  No.  2  Henry  Sweets   2 . 50         5 '.  00 

15  No.  2  Baldwins   2.75       41.25 

3  No.  1  Hubbardsons  3 . 50       10 . 50 

5  No.  2  Hubbardsons    2 . 50       12 . 50 

2  No.  2  Henry  Sweets  2 . 50  5 .00 

4  No.  2  Baldwins 2 . 75  1 1 . 00 

1  No.  1  Baldwins  4 . 00  4 . 00 

1  No.  1  Hubbardsons  3.50 

3  No.  2  Hubbardsons 2.50         7 . 50 

1  No.  2  Hubbardsons    2 . 50 

6  ungraded  Baldwins   3 . 00       18 . 00 

4  No.  1  Baldwins   4.00       16.00 

8  baskets  apples    1 . I2,y2     9  00 

38  baskets  cabbage  1 . 25       47 . 50 

9  barrels  cabbage   3 . 00       27 . 00 

423.50 

DISTKIBUTOR'S    PEOFITS 

The  Committee  lias  endeavored  to  ascertain  as  nearly  as  may 
be  the  profits  accruing  to  distributors  in  general  in  their  business 
of  buying  milk,  transporting  it  to  the  cities,  and  bringing  it  to  the 
consumer's  door.  The  Committee  appreciated  that  a  fair  determi- 
nation of  these  profits  is  of  the  utmost  importance  both  to  the 
dairyman  of  the  State  and  consumers  of  market  milk.  Without 
an  intelligent  understanding  of  these  profits  and  the  attendant 
costs,  difficulties  are  bound  to  arise  which  become  of  serious  im- 
portance. It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  handlers  of  market 
milk  had  in  very  recent  years  divided  more  or  less  into  two  classes. 
Until  very  recent  years,  the  milk  business  had  developed  along 
lines  peculiar  to  itself.  The  dealer  who  brought  the  bottle  of  milk 
to  the  door  was  responsible  for  its  condition.  Its  condition  de- 
pended entirely  upon  its  prior  handling.  The  milk  company  in 
the  large  cities  which  had  established  successful  routes,  in  order  to 


388 

retain  its  customers  in  the  face  of  constantly  increasing  competi- 
tion, was  bound  to  satisfy  the  customer  as  to  the  quality  of  the  milk 
delivered.  In  time,  this  led  the  large  dealer  with  valuable  dis- 
tributing routes  to  seek  to  obtain  the  possession  of  the  milk  at  the 
oarliest  possible  moment  from  the  dairymen,  and  handle  it  and 
keep  it  continuously  in  his  possession  until  it  was  delivered  in 
the  form  of  bottled  milk  to  the  consumer.  Scarcely  any  other  fnotl 
product  is  handled  in  a  similar  way. 

This  evident  necessity  led  to  the  growth  and  development  of 
the  large  milk  distributing  companies  in  the  City  of  Xcw  York 
with  their  stations  dotted  along  all  the  lines  of  railroad  leading 
into  the  City  within  an  area  of  three  or  four  hundred  mile?, 
wherein  milk  might  be  found.  These  plants  were  built  to  comply 
with  city  health  requirements,  and  as  the  practice  of  pasteuriza- 
tion developed,  the  milk  company  rendering  service  to  the  con- 
sumer, established  central  pasteurizing  plants  either  in  the  city 
or  suitable  country  districts,  by  means  of  which  they  sought  to 
ensure  themselves  of  a  constant  daily  supply  of  the  product  re- 
quired by  their  trade,  which  would  be  sure  to  pass  the  inspection 
rules  of  the  Department  of  Health.  It  suggests  itself  to  this  Com- 
mittee from  the  evidence  received  by  it  that  during  the  years  1014, 
1915  and  1016,  it  became  difficult  for  these  companies  to  secure 
an  adequate  supply  at  all  times  for  their  purposes  at  the  prevail- 
ing prices.  They  felt  that  production  could  not  be  encouraged  by 
an  increase  in  the  price  paid  to  the  dairyman,  as  has  been  before 
suggested.  An  increased  price  would  mean  trouble  with  the 
boards'  of  aldermen  in  Buffalo  and  New  York,  for  instance, 
trouble  for  them  in  the  public  press,  and  a  bitter  feeling  on  the 
part  of  the  consumer.  Therefore,  it  appeared  to  them  that  the 
solution  of  their  difficulties  lay  in  the  extension  of  the  field  where 
they  could  gather  milk  at  the  prevailing  price,  and  a  careful 
searching  out  of  the  nooks  and  corners  which  were  unprovided 
with  convenient  shipping  facilities  by  which  means  they  might 
add  to  their  supply.  This  situation  developed  a  new  factor  in  the 
market  milk  trade,  to  wit;  the  jobber  or  middleman,  and  it  is  sug- 
gested by  the  evidence  before  the  Committee  that  some  of  the 
agencies  created  by  the  State  of  New  York,  encouraged  and  really 


389 

created  in  the  City  of  Xew  York  a  new  sort  of  middleman  in  the 
milk  trade  who  at  once  became  a  burden  upon  the  business  and 
proceeded  to  collect  pay  both  from  the  producer  and  consumer. 
In  places  and  at  times  he  temporarily  increased  the  prices,  to  a 
very  small  extent,  received  by  the  dairymen  in  certain  small  sec- 
tions, but  of  course  bringing  no  permanent  relief  to  the  dairy 
situation.  This  jobber  or  middleman  rendered  no  service  of  any 
kind  to  the  consumer.  lie  assumed  no  responsibilities ;  he  had  no 
capital  invested.  As  is  the  middleman's  uniform  practice,  he 
simply  by  rapid  action  availed  himself  of  the  capital  of  the  pro- 
ducer and  the  necessities  of  the  consumer  and  distributor.  Mr.  Van 
San,  whoso  evidence  is  hereafter  referred  to,  is  a  fair  type  of  this 
sort  of  middleman,  taking  a  profit  wherever  he  found  it  with  little 
responsibility  to  the  actual  interests  either  of  the  producer  or  the 
consumer.  These  middlemen  or  jobbers  in  an  era  of  scarcity  found 
at  once  a  profitable  field  of  activity.  From  time  to  time  the  dis- 
tributors were  in  great  need  of  small  additional  supplies-  of  milk 
for  their  customers.  The  middleman  having  under  his  control 
such  small  supplies  and  trading  upon  the  necessities  of  these 
dealers,  who  rendered  service  to  the  consumer  and  had  capital  in- 
vested, was  able  to  secure  from  them  for  a  temporary  supply  a 
price  which  the  selling  price  of  the  entire  product,  as  shown  by 
the  auditor's  report,  would  not  permit. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  these  jobbers  were  unconcerned 
as  to  what  would  happen  the  consumer  on  any  to-morrow  or  any 
subsequent  month.  He  had  no  dealings  with  the  consumer;  he  had 
no  good-will  or  trade  name  to  protect ;  he  had  no  capital  invested, 
and  the  simple  situation  was  that  if  there  was  a  dearth  or  shortage 
in  the  supply  in  a  subsequent  month  it  did  not  concern  him  at  all; 
his  only  problem  being  to  make  a  nimble  profit  on  the  current 
amount  under  his  control.  A  mere  statement  of  the  case  indicates 
that  the  growth  and  development  of  middlemen  of  this  sort  in  any 
business  is  undesirable  and  an  evil  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
producer,  distributor  or  the  consumer.  Their  practices  afford  no 
aid  to  any  reasonable  solution  of  the  trade  difficulties.  They 
simply  amount  to  a  new  group  of  men  declaring  themselves  "in" 
on  the  traffic,  who  ultimately  became  an  unnecessary  burden  to 
the  producer  and  consumer. 


390 

That  in  the  past  large  profits  have  sometimes  been  made  in  the 
matter  of  distributing  market  milk  is  undeniable.  Also  there  have 
been  large  losses.  Its  history  appears  to  be  similar  to  other  lines 
of  business.  The  Committee  has  exact  figures  for  the  year  end- 
ing June  30,  1916,  only. 

The  amount  of  those  profits  for  that  year  are  best  shown  by  the 
exhibits  hereinafter  set  out.  They  need  no  comment  from  this 
Committee.  Every  person  who  takes  the  trouble  to  study  them  is 
capable  of  reaching  a  conclusion  as  to  what  they  may  indicate  as 
to  the  future  cost  of  dairy  products  to  people  of  this  State  as  well 
as  the  Committee.  We  seem  unquestionably  to  have  reached  a 
period  when  the  dairyman  is  going  to  demand  and  receive  higher 
prices  for  dairy  products.  Such  products,  although  vitally  neces- 
sary to  the  sustenance  of  the  people,  seem  to  have  been  produced 
in  the  past  with  great  ease  and  almost  as  freely  as  bounteous 
nature  could  provide  without  being  charged  with  a  large  labor  cost. 
But  labor  has  become  an  item  of  great  value.  .  One  is  prohibited 
by  law  practically  from  referring  to  it  as  a  commodity,  but  to-day 
it  is  assured  of  a  market,  and  the  dairyman's  wife  and  family  en- 
gaged in  the  work  of  producing  dairy  products  now  begin  to  speak 
of  compensation  and  a  labor  return  for  their  time,  which,  in  years 
gone  by,  we  believe  to  have  been  a  factor  practically  ignored.  If 
labor  cost  accountings  of  the  farm  owner  as  superintendent,  of  the 
farm  wife  as  an  employee,  and  of  the  grown  children  as  industrial 
wage-earners,  are,  for  the  future  to  be  taken  account  of  and  added 
to  the  cost  of  this  product,  it  seems  to  be  at  once  evident  that  mar- 
ket milk,  butter,  and  cheese  at  once  become  clothed  with  elements 
of  value  which  have  not  heretofore  been  considered.  In  that 
event,  the  milk  distributor  at  the  country  station  instead  of  assum- 
ing that  he  had  left  on  hand  from  the  sale  price  a  certain  amount 
of  money  for  the  dairyman  which  he  tenders  him  for  his  milk  and 
which  he  obediently  accepts,  must  first  go  to  the  country  station, 
ascertain  the  costs  of  production,  the  required  profit  to  encourage 
and  continue  production  by  those  connected  with  the  industry,  and 
beginning  with  that  figure  ascertain  his  own  labor  costs  and  cap- 
ital earnings  and  base  the  price  to  the  consumer  on  those  factors. 
If  these  products  of  the  soil  are  to  be  treated  in  this  fashion,  it 


391 

strongly  suggests  itself  that  for  the  future  higher  prices  must 
necessarily  prevail  to  the  consumer  for  dairy  products. 

The  evidence  before  us  suggests  that  the  era  of  cheap  production 
of  Western  butter  and  cheese  has  nearly  closed.  On  the  large 
stock  and  grain  farms  of  the  West,  milk  and  consequently  butter 
and  cheese  were  produced  substantially  as  a  by-product,  handled 
and  disposed  of  as  such  without  the  necessity  of  close  attention  to 
the  cost  factors  involved.  From  those  Western  states  have  largely 
come  in  current  years  the  supply  of  butter  and  cheese,  the  produc- 
tion of  which  has  fallen  comparatively  low  in  this  State  with  the 
great  increase  in  the  demand  for  market  milk.  That  the  labor 
conditions  now  prevailing  in  the  East  must  ultimately  affect  those 
farming  States  seems  clear.  When  that  situation  is  fully  devel- 
oped, butter  and  cheese  prices  will  approach  the  present  prevail- 
ing prices  in  New  York  for  market  milk.  Take  February,  1917, 
for  example,  100  pounds  of  market  milk  testing  4  per  cent,  costs 
$2.35.  This  would  scarcely  make  five  pounds  of  butter,  which 
would  make  the  cost  of  that  product  47  cents  per  pound  at  the 
creamery  before  costs  of  manufacture  were  added.  There  seems 
to  be  little  escape  from  the  conclusion  therefore,  unless  dairymen 
are  ready  to  concede  that  the  price  of  milk  is  to  be  reduced,  that 
a  general  increase  in  the  cost  to  the  consumer  of  all  kinds  of  dairy 
products  lies  in  the  immediate  future.  Any  ultimate  decrease  in 
the  cost  of  these  products  depends,  so  far  as  can  be  seen,  largely 
upon  two  possible  steps  aside  from  a  general  lowering  of  the  wage 
scale  or  the  demand  for  labor. 

First,  a  large  increase  in  production,  which  is  the  only  sure  and 
sufficient  way  to  lower  the  price.  A  farm  run  to  its  full  dairy 
capacity  should  produce  a  larger  amount  at  a  less  cost  than  one 
run  at  four-fifths  its  capacity ;  so  that  by  encouraging  larger  pro- 
duction and  an  abundant  supply  there  is  a  natural  tendency  to 
reduce  the  price. 

Second,  by  eliminating  unnecessary  services  or  wastes  in  the 
distribution.  This  can  only  be  done  by  providing  laws  which  will 
aid  in  every  way  the  economic  distribution  of  milk  and  other 
dairy  products.  This  will  necessitate  eliminating  the  necessity 


392 

for  all  jobbers  and  unnecessary  intruders  upon  the  traffic  of  all 
kinds. 

Every  milk  dealer  and  distributing  company  throughout  the 
State  to  whom  the  Committee  has  applied  has  turned  over  to  the 
Committee  all  the  records  and  accounts  of  their  business  without 
hindrance.  The  interests  of  the  State  in  this  question  and  erro- 
neous ideas  existing  and  proclaimed  require  that  the  result  of  the 
studies  of  their  books  and  accounts  should  be  given  to  the  public. 
It  became  necessary  to  place  those  books  and  records  and  the  in- 
vestigations to  be  made  therefrom  in  the  hands  of  competent  ac- 
countants. The  Committee  sought  for  this  work  a  certified  ac- 
countant who  should  be  free  from  prejudice,  competent  to  make 
the  studies  involved,  and  free  from  alliances  or  connected  with  this 
industry  in  any  way. 

In  order  to  secure  such  result,  the  Committee  took  the 
matter  up  with  the  Dairy  Division  of  the  United  States  De- 
partment of  Agriculture,  which  Department  is  shown  by  its 
work  to  be  greatly  interested  in  these  questions.  After  con- 
siderable discussion,  W.  IT.  Kerr,  Esq.,  Assistant  Chief  of  the 
Bureau  of  Markets  of  the  United  States  Department  of  Agricul- 
ture, recommended  to  the  Committee  the  employment  for  this 
work  of  Mr.  Herbert  B.  Hawkins,  certified  accountant,  of  198 
Broadway,  ISTew  York,  who  had  supplied  certain  work  for  the  use 
of  the  Department  in  the  way  of  cost  systems.  In  examining  into 
Mr.  Hawkins'  work,  the  Committee  ascertained  that  he  had  had 
experience  both  as  an  office  and  business  manager  and  as  a  public 
practitioner  in  accounting  work;  that  he  had  been  and  was  en- 
gaged in  actuarial  work,  and  in  constructing  and  installing  func- 
tional cost  systems  with  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Investigations 
and  Statistics  of  !N"ewT  York  City.  The  Committee  secured  the 
services  of  Mr.  Hawkins,  and  the  investigation  and  studies  of  the 
books  of  the  large  milk  distributors  in  New  York  City  was  under- 
taken and  continued  from  early  in  the  month  of  August,  1916, 
practically  until  this  date.  The  results  of  those  studies  are  shown 
in  the  accompanying  reports.  The  Committee  can  say  no  more  as 
to  these  reports  except  to  state  that  the  Committee  believes  them 
to  be  entirety  honest,  unprejudiced  and  reliable.  The  larger  com- 
panies have  publicly  announced  that  they  welcome  the  checking  of 


393 

their  books  by  any  other  competent  and  approved  accountants. 
Therefore,  we  take  it,  that  these  reports  must  be  accepted  as  em- 
bodying the  truth.  Doubtless  many  persons  will  be  surprised  at 
the  narrow  margin  of  profits  accruing  from  the  distribution  of 
market  milk,  as  revealed  by  these  reports. 

As  a  preliminary  and  as  affording  a  basis  of  comparison  to  the 
business  of  distributing  market  milk  in  the  city  of  Xew  York,  it 
may  be  well  to  bear  in  mind  that  there  are  other  cities  in  the  State 
of  New  York  demanding  and  receiving  large  supplies  of  market 
milk  which  is  distributed  by  companies  having  large  capital  in- 
vestment and  doing  a  large  business.  Some  of  these  companies  are 
highly  successful.  Some  are  making  a  strong  bid  for  success  and 
operating  for  the  time  at  very  low  margin  of  profits;  some  have 
been  found  who  are  actually  in  financial  difficulties,  but  in  order 
that  it  may  be  understood  that  the  business  outside  of  New  York 
City  is  not  entirely  gloomy  in  aspect,  we  present  for  comparative 
purposes  the  balance  sheet  of  one  company  engaged  in  the  business 
of  distributing  milk  in  the  city  of  Rochester.  This  company  is 
known  as  the  Big  Elm  Dairy  Company  of  Rochester  and  has  a 
capital  stock  of  $60,000. 

JANUARY  BALANCE  SHEET 

Gross  sales $27,794  TO 

Discounts  and  allowances   726  46 

$27,068  33 

Inventory,  1st  of  month $2,278  81 

Purchases 17,507  02 


Total.  ....  $19,785  83 

Less  present  inventory 1,933  00 

Balance.  .  •. .  17,852  83 


Trading  profit $9,215  50 

Expense: 

Miscellaneous  expense $564  52 

Light,  heat  and  power 328  47 

Blacksmith  shop    177  88 

Bottles  and  caps 2,748  00 

Fuel  and  bedding 458  87 

Dairy  supplies   - 

Barn  expense  137  75 

Advertising 229  31 

Office  supplies   Ill  06 

Harness  repairs  29  55 

Insurance    38  33 

Repairs  and  replacements   54  81 

Telephone  and  telegraph 31  67 


Miscellaneous  expense   221  96 

Freight    2,676  00 

Donations    6  50 

Interest 

Cartage 102  03 

Horse  shoeing   27  00 

Labor,  dairy   894  78 

Labor,   distribution    2,470  00 

Labor,  foreman 346  02 

Commissions    121  41 

Soliciting    86  67 

Office  help 652  92 

Manager's  salary 400  00 

Depreciation  on  bottles 350  00 

General  depreciation   463  07 


Total  expense    8,729  22 


Balance  net $486  28 

Miscellaneous  income   .  33  50 


Net  profit $519  78 


NOTE. — There  is  probably  error  in  the  minutes  as  to  the  figures  of  the  various 
items  of  expense  included  in  the  above  schedule,  but  the  balance  net  for  the 
month  of  over  $500  was  correctly  given. 

The  same  balance  sheet  for  the  month  of  July,  1916,  showed 
net  income  from  operation  $2,680.24. 

Thus,  we  see  in  this  very  prosperous  company  a  net  profit  of 
$500  for  the  month  of  January,  as  compared  with  the  net  profit 
of  $2,680.24  for  the  month  of  July,  1916.  An  average  of  the 
January  profits  with  the  July  profits  for  similar  months  through- 
out the  year  shows  a  very  handsome  profit  by  this  Company  upon 
the  capital  stock.  This  is  an  old  established  company  which  has 
undoubtedly  accumulated  a  surplus,  the  amount  of  which  and  the 
resulting  total  invested  capital  is  not  set  down  in  the  stenograph- 
er's minutes,  and  therefore  it  is  not  assumed  to  be  given,  but  net 
earnings  of  nearly  one  per  cent,  in  the  month  of  January  and  of 
over  four  per  cent,  in  the  month  of  July  upon  the  capital  stock 
evidently  enable  it  to  pay  to  its  stockholders  abundant  dividends. 
However,  the  financial  statement  of  this  company  cannot  at  all 
be  said  to  be  typical  of  the  great  majority  of  companies  engaged 
in  the  milk  distributing  business  in  up-state  cities.  The  earnings 
upon  the  capital  stock  in  most  of  the  companies  examined  are 
much  more  modest.  The  books  examined  of  two  or  more  of  them 
in  large  up-state  cities  showed  great  difficulties  encountered  in 


395 

building  up  a  substantial  capital  and  reserve  fund  to  maintain 
the  business. 

The  accountant's  report  on  the  Xew  York  City's  industries  is 
largely  confined  to  the  following  companies:  The  Borden' s  Con- 
densed Milk  Company,  Farm  Products  Division;  Sheffield  Farms 
Slawson-Decker  Company ;  Alex.  Campbell  Milk  Company ;  Clover 
Farms,  Inc. ;  Mutual  McDermott  Dairy  Corporation.  In  the  first 
four  mentioned,  the  accountant  in  the  time  allowed,  with  his 
assistants,  was  able  to  complete  the  full  audit  of  the  books.  They 
were  selected  by  the  accountant,  not  at  all  with  the  idea  of  giving 
to  the  public  the  records  of  certain  companies  and  not  all  of 
them,  but  with  the  purpose  of  getting  four  type  companies  whose 
records  would  aid  in  the  solution  of  the  question  of  cost  distribu- 
tion and  net  profits.  This  question  is  of  sufficient  importance  so 
that  these  records  should  unhesitatingly  be  disclosed  in  this  report 
to  the  end  that  a  complete  understanding  of  the  problems  involved 
may  be  afforded  to  all  those  interested  in  the  matter,  and  to  the 
public.  We  preface  the  accountant's  report  on  the  analysis  of  the 
Borden  Company's  books  by  a  statement  made  in  connection  there- 
with by  the  Borden  Company  to  the  Committee  under  date  of 
November  25,  1916: 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  CO. 
EXECUTIVE  OFFICES 
108  Hudson  Street 

NEW  YORK  CITY,  November  25,  1916. 

Hon  CHARLES  W.  WICKS,  Chairman,  Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy 
Products,  Live  Stock  and  Poultry,  Murray  Hill  Hotel,  New  York  City: 

Sir. — We  realize  how  desirous  your  Committee  is  to  have  the  real  facts  of 
the  milk  business  and  how  unfortunate  it  would  be  for  both  yourselves  and 
ourselves,  as  well  as  the  industry  in  general,  should  any  of  your  final  conclu- 
eions  be  based  on  other  than  the  real  facts. 

Except  for  your  general  study  of  the  situation  and  testimony  given,  you  are, 
we  presume,  largely  dependent  upon  the  report  of  the  State's  accountant,  Mr. 
H.  B.  Hawkins,  for  guiding  information.  His  report  in  so  far  as  it  affects  us 
is,  of  course,  based  very  largely  on  a  study  of  the  books  and  records  of  this 
Company.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say  that  the  text  of  the  report  is  un- 
known to  us. 

At  the  risk  of  acquainting  you  with  facts  that  you  have  probably  already 
learned  from  Mr.  Hawkins,  we  would  call  your  attention  to  the  comparative 
costs  of  Grade  "A"  and  Grade  "B"  as  shown  by  our  records. 


39G 

In  so  far  as  a  reading  of  our  cost  sheets  goes  it  might  appear  that  tlrere  is 
practically  no  difference  in  cost  of  Grade  "A"  and  Grade  "B"  milk. 

There  has  been  no  special  reason  why  this  product  should  be  shown  sep- 
arately. 

The  product  itself  is  young  and  the  volume  of  sales  has  been  comparatively 
small. 

Much  detail  would  be  involved  in  order  to  provide  a  proper  distribution  of 
expense  so  that  the  direct  cost  of  the  product  and  the  cost  of  its  distribution 
could  be  obtained. 

Considerable  expense  would  be  incurred  in  establishing  a  separate  account- 
ing for  Grade  "A"  product. 

There  are  factors  entering  into  the  cost  of  Grade  "A"  which  as  a  matter  of 
course  make  it  a  more  expensive  product  than  other  fluid  milk,  certified  ex- 
cepted,  and  this  fact  is  apparent  without  the  necessity  of  a  separate  ac- 
counting. 

The  arrangement  of  our  accounts  is  not  made  because  there  is  any  fixed  pro- 
cedure or  general  law  to  be  followed,  but  solely  for  the  convenience  of  those 
who  manage  and  guide  the  business,  and  the  fact  that  all  possible  combinations 
of  results  are  not  portrayed  in  the  accounts  cannot  be  considered  an  impro- 
priety. 

As  proof  that  there  is  a  very  great  difference  in  the  costs  of  the  two  prod- 
ucts we  call  your  attention  to  the  following  expense  items  which  are  directly 
chargeable  to  Grade  "A."  All  of  these  are  tangible  differences,  viz: 

Premiums  paid  for  raw  milk  qualifying  for  Grade  "A"  Milk 

uses,  applied  to  Grade  "A"  sales 01333  per  qt. 

Exclusively  Grade  "A"  Covers,  Seals  and  Extra  Labor  in 

Sealing  00235  per  qt. 

Average  Grade  "A"  greater  freight 00127  per  qt. 

Total    .  .01695 


In  addition  to  the  foregoing  there  are  various  items  of  expense  which,  while 
we  know  they  exist  and  are  caused  by  the  Grade  "A"  product,  nevertheless,  we 
cannot  express  the  additional  cost  in  figures.  We  enumerate: 

1.  The  Department  of  Health  does  not  permit  a  country  plant  to  re- 
receive  Grade  "A"  milk  and  Grade  "B"  milk  at  the  same  time,  thereby 
adding  considerable  to  the  cost  of  handling. 

2.  The  Department  of  Health  does  not  permit  Grade  "A"  milk  and 
Grade  "B"  milk  to  be  kept  in. the  same  room  at  the  same  time,  thereby 
causing  extra  expense  in  handling. 

3.  The  Department  of  Health  does  not  permit  the  Company  to  use  the 
same  equipment  for  Grade  "A"  milk  and  Grade  "B"  milk.     Therefore,  to 
install  the  additional  equipment  to  handle  Grade  "A"  milk  has  greatly 
added  to  our  investment. 

Argument  may  be  made  that  if  all  of  these  charges  had  gone  against  Grade 
"A"  that  other  products  would  have  been  correspondingly  relieved.  This  is 
quite  true.  It  would  not  have  changed  the  average  profit  per  quart,  however, 
since  all  ef  these  charges  were  included  in  arriving  at  the  results  though 
spread  over  the  various  products  of  the  Farm  Products  Division. 

The  question  might  be  raised  as  to  why  we  purchased  milk  qualifying  for  the 
Grade  "A"  product  so  largely  in  excess  of  Grade  "A"  sales  requirements.  By 


397 

so  doing  we  folio  \v\nl  our  policy  of  encouraging  high  standards  of  production. 

To  have  done  otherwise  would  have  been  discouraging  to  the  producer,  who, 
without  previous  notice  to  the  contrary,  took  on  the  expense  incident  to  the 
production  of  raw  milk  qualifying  for  the  Grade  "A"  product,  believing  that 
the  market  existed  for  his  quality  product. 

Further,  the  production  of  premium  milk  has  been  so  generally  taken  up  by 
producers  that  it  has  far  outstripped  Grade  "A"  sales  requirement,  and  much 
of  it  goes  to  improve  the  Grade  "B"  average.  In  fact,  milk  qualifying  for 
Grade  "A"  uses  is  such  a  large  portion  of  the  production  that  its  elimination 
would  not  only  discourage  quality  production,  but  would  bring  about  a  serious 
shortage  and  cause  the  closing  of  som-e  plants  altogether. 

By  following  the  policy  that  we  did  in  this  matter,  both  producer  and  con- 
sumer benefittod.  We  were  the  only  losers. 

If  the  sending  of  this  letter  has  had  the  effect  of  clarifying  this  matter, 
thereby  avoiding  misunderstanding,  we  know  that  because  of  your  adopted 
standards  its  receipt  will  be  welcomed. 

Yours  very  truly, 

BOEDER'S  CONDENSED  MILK  CO., 
FAEM  PRODUCTS  DIVISION, 
(Signed)     H.  N.  HALLOCK, 

Vice-President. 


REPORT 


TO 

JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 

ON 

SPECIAL  SUBJECTS  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  THE  EXAMINATION  OF 
BOOKS  OF  ACCOUNT  OF  BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COM- 
PANY,, N"EW  YORK,  IN".  Y. 


[399] 


SPECIAL  REPORT  IN  CONNECTION  WITH  AND  FORM- 
ING A  PART  OF  REPORT  ON  COSTS  OF  BORDERS 
CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY. 

November  25,  1916. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

Gentlemen. — The  Bordeii  Condensed  Milk  Company  is  a  cor- 
poration with  issued  and  outstanding  capital  stock  of  $28,810,200, 
of  which  $7,500,000  is  preferred  and  $21,310,200  is  common 
stock.  The  company  conducts  a  general  business  in  the  purchase 
of  raw  milk,  and  the  manufacturing  and  distributing  of  same 
through  its  various  departments  in  the  form  of  preserved  milk, 
evaporated  milk,  malted  milk,  dry  milk,  and  what  are  known  as 
route  products,  distributed  by  the  Farm  Products  Division,  which 
division,  particularly,  is  the  basis  of  this  report.  In  general,  the 
Farm  Products  Division  does  about  fifty  per  cent,  of  the  business 
of  the  entire  company  on  a  gross  sale  basis,  while  the  profits  of  this 
division  are  about  twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the  total  profits  of  the 
company. 

This  organization  operates  a  complete  cost  system  for  every  de- 
partment. The  distribution  of  expenses  over  various  costs  are 
made  on  a  true  functional  cost  basis,  so  that  the  cost  of  each  func- 
tion entering  into  the  cost  of  each  product  at  each  factory  or  branch 
is  determined.  In  contrast  to  a  company  operating  without  a 
system  of  this  kind,  permit  me  to  say  that  in  none  of  their  records 
would  it  be  found  possible  to  analyze  specific  classes  of  expenses 
incurred  for  each  department  of  their  organization.  On  the  con- 
trary, any  one  class  of  expense  might  be  distributed  to  one  or  many 
of  the  various  functions  that  are  performed  in  the  production  or 
distribution  of  any  product  at  any  or  all  factories  or  branches, 
without  regard  to  the  total  of  that  one  expense,  for  any  one  or  all 
factories  or  branches.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  at  the  outset,  that 
a  comparison  on  an  expense  classification  basis  of  the  operations 
of  this  company  with  other  companies,  reports  of  which  you  have 


402 

or  will  receive,  is  impossible  without  a  complete  re-analysis  of  all 
expenses  on  a  different  basis  than  is  here  used.  However,  the 
major  functions  of  the  company  are  herein  subdivided  as  in  other 
companies,  and  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  unit  profit  on  a 
quart  of  milk  purchased,  is  approximately  the  same. 

The  voluminous  detail  contained  in  a  large  organization  such 
as  this,  prohibits  a  detailed  checking  of  the  correctness  of  all  items 
entering  into  costs.  In  this  case,  however,  innumerable  tests  were 
made  of  vouchers  and  the  proper  distribution  of  general  selling 
and  administrative  expenses,  and  where  possible,  opening  and 
closing  inventories  were  examined.  In  connection  with  the  vouch- 
ers examined,  very  few,  if  any,  call  for  more  than  passing  men- 
tion, and  in  connection  with  these,  permit  me  to  note  as  follows : 

Invoice  No.   308191   for  $86.00   in   favor   of   the   Farm   Products   Division, 
consists  of  a  $50  subscription  to  Broad  Street  Hospital,  and  a  $25  member- 
ship fee  in  the  International  Milk  Dealers'  Association. 
Invoices  as  follows: 

To  the  North  Public  Health  Bureau  for  examination   and   laboratory 
tests: 

Invoice   276067    $655  00 

Invoice  282186   1,500  00 

(The  above  invoice  of  $1,500  is  a  bill  for  an  account  with- 
out details.) 
Invoice    296390    590  00 


Invoice  No.  252490.  Memorandum  order  to  pay  W.  B.  Richards,  $100.00 
in  connection  with  opposing  legislation,  antagonistic  to  efficiency  in 
American  industry. 

Treasurer's  vouchers: 

Check  to  the  order  of  Empire  State  Dairy  Company,  $350.00  to  pay  for 
pro-rata  share  of  expenses  involved  in  securing  an  exemption  from 
Industrial  Commission  under  the  so-called  "  one-day-of-rest-in-seven 
law". 

Check  to  the  order  of  Thomas  M.  Rowlette,  Mechanics'  Metal  National 
Bank,  June  12,  1916,  for  $6,688.62,  in  payment  of  services  and  expenses 
in  conducting  various  actions  of  which  the  case  of  Alexander  vs.  Borden 
is  one,  and  the  expenses  of  this  case,  amounting  to  $95.60  were  spent 
as  follows: 

Subpoena  for  Officer  Close $3  00 

Subpoena  for  Officer  McGrath 3  00 

Subpoena  for  Officer  Fitzgerald 3  00 

Subpoena  for  Officer  Kurneist 3-00 

Luncheon,  four  policemen   4  00 

Paid  Officer  McGrath 25  00 

Paid  Officer  Kurneist 20  00 

Paid  Officer  Close   ]  0  00 

Sundries 24  60 


Total $9J  60 


403 

Check  to  the  order  of  Masten  and  Nichols,  Attorneys  to  the  Company, 
for  $3,000.00  in  connection  with  the  engagaement  by  Mr.  Beverly  R. 
Robinson  of  the  above  firm,  of  Mr.  Speer  in  reference  to  renewing  the 
engagement  of  Mr.  Speer,  the  services  of  Mr.  Speer  being  in  connection 
with  legislative  matters. 

Voucher  No.  121043  in  favor  of  G.  P.  Washburn  (an  employee  of  the 
Borden  Condensed  Milk  Company)  shows  expenditure  of  $1.60  for  lunch- 
eon with  Mr.  Lee  of  Board  of  Health. 

Voucher  No.  124945  in  favor  of  G.  L.  Hotchkin  shows  expenditure  of 
$14.10  for  driving  Health  Inspector  among  "  our "  dairies  84  miles  at 
15  cents  a  mile  ($12.60)  and  two  meals  and  lodging  at  Bridgeport 
($1.50)  for  the  purpose  of  securing  Grade  "A"  dairies. 

If  there  is  any  information  that  the  Committee  wishes  in  con- 
nection with  this  examination  and  which  can  be  obtained  from 
the  working  papers  used  in  making  same,  I  will  be  very  glad  to 
make  additional  reports  on  any  subject  in  which  the  Committee 
may  be  further  interested. 

Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 
Certified  Public  Accountant, 


REPORT 

TO 


JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 


OPERATING,  MANUFACTURING  AND  DELIVERY  COSTS  OF  MILX. 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  (FARM  PRODUCTS 
DIVISION),  108  HUDSON  STREET,  NEW  YORK,  ~K.  Y. 


[405J 


OPERATING,    MAXUFACTUKING    AKD    DELIVERY 
COSTS  OF  MILK 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

Gentlemen. — Agreeable  to  your  request,  I  have  made  an  ex- 
amination of  the  books  of  account  of  the  Borden  Condensed  Milk 
Company,  108  Hudson  street,  ISTew  York  city,  with  special  ref- 
erence to  operating,  manufacturing  and  distributing  costs  of  fluid 
milk  by  the  Farm  Products  Division  of  company  for  the  period 
of  July  1,  1915,  to  June  30,  1916,  and  I  am  attaching  hereto 
remarks  in  connection  with  various  exhibits  and  schedules  sup- 
porting the  same.  I  am  also  handing  you  herewith,  under  separate 
cover,  a  general  report  of  this  examination  which  is  to  be  con- 
sidered and  is  a  part  of  all  papers  attached  hereto. 

I  want  to  take  this  opportunity  of  thanking  the  officials  of  the 
Borden  Condensed  Milk  Company  with  whom  I  came  in  contact, 
for  their  complete  willingness  in  extending  to  me  every  possible 
facility  in  conducting  this  examination. 

Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 
Certified  Public  Accountant. 

EXHIBITS  ISTos.  1  AND  2  AND  STATEMENT  "A"  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Attached  hereto  is  a  reconstructed  statement  of  the  unit  profit 
on  the  total  quantity  of  milk  purchased  and  sold  by  the  Farm 
Products  Division  through  their  Eastern  branches,  either  as  fluid 
milk,  cream,  butter  or  other  products.  This  statement  is  recon- 
structed on  the  basis  that  $66,426.12  was  an  overcharge  for  quart 
bottles  charged  to  cost  of  the  operations  of  the  Eastern  branch  of 
the  Farm  Products  Division  as  per  Statement  "  A  "  supporting 
this  exhibit. 

Exhibit  ISTo.  2  is  the  statement  of  unit  profits  published  by  this 
company  and  herein  supported  by  quantity  figures,  all  of  which 
is  as  per  their  books.  In  making  tests  of  the  correctness  of  costs, 

[407] 


408 

it  was  learned,  in  connection  with,  the  overcharge  for  quart  bottles, 
that  from   July   1,   1911,   to  June   1,    1915,   no  complete  satis- 
factory   control    of    bottles    used    and    broken    was    obtainable. 
The    records    showed    that    on    that    date,    and    monthly    there- 
after,   inventories    were   obtained    of   bottles    on   hand.      At   the 
beginning   of   the    fiscal   year,    or    July    1,    1915  —  one   month 
subsequent    to    the    period    above    mentioned  —  the    books    re- 
corded on  hand  3,988,091  quart  bottles,  whereas  the  inventory 
taken  showed  but  2,242,998  quart  bottles  or  a  net  shortage  of 
1,745,093  bottles.     Instead  of  adjusting  the  books  to  show  the 
actual  quantity  of  bottles  on  hand  by  charging  the  loss  to  surplus, 
the  monthly  depreciation  on  quart  bottles  was  increased  to  a  rate 
that,  on  June  30,  1916,  this  shortage,  amounting  to  1,745,093,  of 
previous  years,  had  not  only  been  charged  to  the  cost  of  operating 
for  the  fiscal  year  1915  - 1916  but  in  addition,   529,852   quart 
bottles  over  and  above  the  number  of  bottles  shown  to  have  been 
broken,  as  per  the  inventory  on  the  books,  were  charged  to  operat- 
ing costs.  This  statement  is  shown  for  the  Eastern  branches  only.  It 
will  be  noted  by  referring  to  Statement  "  A  "  of  Exhibit  No.  1  that 
the  western  branches  will  also  show  quart  bottles  to  the  value  of 
$9,000  to  have  been  overcharged  to  operating  costs  for  this  period. 
It  will  be  noted  by  comparing  the  reconstructed  statement  of 
costs  in  Exhibit  No.  1  with  the  original  statement  in  Exhibit  ~No.  2, 
that  the  factory  expenses  are  reduced  by  the  value  of  the  bottles, 
which  in  turn  reduced  the  unit  cost  of  factory  expenses  .000304  per 
quart  or  increased  the  profit  from  .002611  to  .002915.     It  must  be 
assumed  that  the  increased  depreciation  charge  for  bottles  was  de- 
termined, having  in  mind  that  insufficient  charges  were  made  pre- 
vious years,  but  the  stand  as  taken  here,  without  qualification  that 
to  hold  on  the  books  losses  of  prior  periods  and  charge  same  into 
eo&ts-  of  a  single  subsequent  period,  is  incorrect. 

It  must  further  be  noted  that  a  correct  inventory  of  bottles  is 
next  to  impossible  to  determine,  but  it  must  be  assumed  also  that 
at  the  beginning  and  ending  of  this  fiscal  period  the  same  means, 
were  used  in  determining  those  figures. 


409 

EXHIBITS  ISTos.  3  AND  3-A 

The  statement  attacked  hereto  showing  a  summary  of  produc- 
tion costs  at  Eastern  and  Western  route  factories  for  the  fiscal 
year  1915  - 1916,  is  interesting  for  comparative  purposes  in  con- 
nection with  the  statement  of  costs  shown  in  Exhibits  !N"os.  5  and  6 
(two  of  the  special  pasteurizing  plants  of  this  company).  It  will 
be  noted  in  examining  the  costs  of  fluid  pasteurized  milk  that  no 
distinction  is  made  between  pasteurized  Grade  "  A  "  and  Grade 
"  Pf  "  milk.  It  will  also  be  noted  that  the  unit  costs  for  producing 
a  quart  bottle  of  fluid  milk  at  country  stations  is  considerably  less 
than  the  cost  of  producing  this  same  article  at  either  of  the  large 
pasteurizing  plants.  It  must  be  taken  into  consideration,  however, 
that  the  two  pasteurizing  plants  shown  herewith  show  a  larger  unit 
cost  than  the  average  unit  cost  of  pasteurized  Grade  UA"  and  Grade 
"  B"  milk  shown  in  Exhibit  ISTo.  8,  which  includes  a  summary  cost 
of  all  Grade  "A"  and  Grade  "  B  "  milk  sold.  The  incorrectness  of 
the  distribution  of  these  costs  in  connection  with  quart  bottles  of 
pasteurized  milk  is  evidenced  by  the  fact  that  no  charge  is  made  to 
the  Grade  "  A  "  milk  for  the  increased  cost  of  handling  nor  for  the 
additional  cost  of  the  special  cap  which  is  used  on  a  Grade  "  A  " 
bottle.  It  will  also  be  noted  further  on,  that  no  distinction  is 
made  in  distributing  costs  for  milk  sold  as  wholesale  or  retail,  and 
this  is  all  the  more  emphasized  by  the  fact  that  charges  to  branch 
stations  where  a  wholesale  business  is  principally  done,  are  made 
at  the  same  rate  as  charges  where  a  retail  business  is  principally 
done,  so  that  stations  conducting  a  wholesale  business  invariably 
show  a  large  loss,  all  of  which  can  be  verified  by  additional  ex- 
hibits and  schedules,  if  they  are  required.  It  will  be  noted  in 
this  (Exhibit  No.  3)  that  there  is  a.  considerable  amount  of  detail 
gone  into  to  determine  costs,  and  if,  in  some  cases,  the  results  are 
not  justified  by  the  actual  conditions,  it  must  be  said  that  great 
credit  is  due  this  company  for  beng  probably  a  pioneer  as  far  as 
the  writer  knows  in  constructing  cost  accounts  for  milk  companies 
on  a  scale  such  as  is  done  herein. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  plant  production  varies  con- 
siderably at  the  different  times  of  the  year,  all  of  which  is  set  forth 
herein,  and  it  will  also  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  production  in  the 
West  is  somewhat  lower  than  the  cost  of  production  in  the  East, 
all  periods  of  the  year  considered. 


410 

EXHIBIT  No.  4 

This  exhibit  is  a  summary  of  the  costs  shown  in  the  ten  sched- 
ules supporting  this  statement.  It  will  be  noted  from  the  summary 
cost  of  production  in  Exhibit  'No.  3  that  these  ten  factories  repre- 
sent a  fair  average  cost  at  country  stations  of  producing  milk  and 
cream  as  shown,  on  the  finished  stock  record  Exhibit  No.  3  not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  there  are  variances  in  the  individual 
factories  set  up  herein.  In  making  tests  of  the  accuracy  of  these 
costs,  pay-roll  vouchers  were  examined  for  certain  months  and  the 
proper  distribution  of  several  of  these  factories  of  route  sales  over- 
head was  determined  and  in  every  case  so  examined  it  was  impossi- 
ble to  take  exception  to  the  correctness  of  same,  with  the  exception, 
as  stated  heretofore,  in  connection  with  the  depreciation  of  bottles. 
The  costs  of  the  various  functions  shown  in  this  exhibit,  and  the 
schedules  supporting  same  are  distributed,  first  to  each  factory,  all 
direct  charges,  and  second,  the  overhead  charges  are  made  to  each 
factory  in  the  proportion  that  the  pounds  of  milk  used  in  a  factory 
bears  to  the  total  pounds  of  milk  used  in  all  factories  each  month. 
Third,  these  charges  (1)  and  (2)  are  again  distributed  on  the 
basis  of  pounds  milk  used  in  each  product  and  on  the  basis  of  ap- 
plied labor  charges  of  each  function  in  producing  each  product. 

It  is  interesting  to  note,  as  aforesaid,  the  great  variance  in  the 
unit  cost  of  milk  at  different  seasons  of  the  year,  and  permit  me 
to  say  that  if  a  summary  is  made  of  the  various  reports  which  I 
will  have  submitted  to  you  in  connection  with  the  examination  of 
milk  companies  for  this  Committee,  particular  note  will  be  made 
in  reference  to  the  fairness  of  a  high  or  a  low  charge  for  milk  to 
the  consumer  in  proportion  to  the  flush  of  the  season.  I  would 
also  call  your  attention  to  the  net  high  or  low  unit  cost  between 
each  of  these  factories,  the  same  representing  principally  a  greater 
or  lower  efficiency  in  operation,  or  an  average  lower  or  higher 
grade  of  milk  purchased. 

EXHIBITS  Nos.  5  AND  6 

The  costs  in  connection  with  operating  the  large  pasteurizing 
plants  of  this  company  are  interesting  to  the  end  that  there  is 
apparently  a  greater  increased  cost  in  their  operation  than  seems 
to  be  at  country  pasteurizing  stations.  This  is  due,  somewhat  to 


411 

the  fact  that  the  milk  on  leaving  the  country  station  for  the  city 
pasteurizing  plant  carries  with  it  a  burden  of  labor  in  handling 
at  the  country  station.  The  question  naturally  arises  at  this  point 
whether  the  larger  city  pasteurizing  plants  are  as  economical  as 
the  country  plants  and  it  is  recommended  herewith  that  the  Com- 
mittee examine  witnesses  so  that  the  broadest  and  fullest  informa- 
tion may  be  obtainable  on  this  point.  There  is  no  end  of  the  com- 
parative information  that  is  obtainable  from  the  statements  sub- 
mitted herewith,  and  as  stated  heretofore,  if  there  is  any  particu- 
lar phase  of  the  cost  of  production  of  milk  that  this  Committee 
would  like  to  have,  I  will  be  glad  to  submit  other  statements  sup- 
porting same. 

EXHIBIT  No.  7 

This  statement  is  an  analysis  of  the  sales  of  various  products 
of  the  Eastern  branch  of  the  Earm  Products  Division,  and  in- 
cludes two  recent  extensions  at  Hartford,  Conn.,  and  Buffalo, 
N.  Y.  The  losses  incurred  at  the  aforesaid  mentioned  stations 
have  not  been  transferred  to  the  profit  and  loss  statement  (Exhibit 
"No.  16)  but  have  been  charged  to  a  reserve  for  losses  on  route 
extensions.  Neither  does  this  statement  include  an  adjustment  to 
the  credit  of  the  Farm  Products  Division,  Eastern  Branches,  of 
$13,Y21.87  as  recommended  by  the  executive  committee  of  this 
company  before  closing  the  books  for  the  fiscal  year.  The  net 
per  cent,  of  profit  of  3. 75  per  cent,  is  somewhat  in  excess  of  the 
net  per  cent,  of  profit  shown  on  Exhibits  JSTos.  1  and  2,  due  princi- 
pally to  the  fact,  in  addition  to  the  aforesaid  qualifications,  that 
losses  on  factory  sales  are  not  included  herewith.  The  percentage 
of  delivery  costs  to  total  expenses  of  22.42  per  cent,  is  further 
analyzed  as  between  general  expenses,  stable  and  selling  expenses, 
etc.,  herein.  It  is  interesting  to  note  in  connection  with  this  state- 
ment that  in  the  distribution  of  costs  there  is  a  loss  on  cream  be- 
tween 2  per  cent,  and  5  per  cent,  and  a  disproportionate  gain  on 
pasteurized  Grade  "  A  "  milk  of  9  per  cent,  due  to  improper  dis- 
tribution of  costs  as  stated  aforesaid  in  connection  with  producing 
this  product. 


412 

EXHIBIT  No.  8  AND  SCHEDULES  1  TO  6  INCLUSIVE 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  a  proportionate  distribution  of  expenses 
is  distributed  to  each  product  sold  by  this  company  in  constructing 
its  cost  accounts,  it  has  been  thought  that  it  would  be  interesting 
to  show  the  actual  profits  on  various  kinds  of  fluid  milk  distributed, 
and  also  the  unit  profit  on  all  fluid  milk  distributed.  It  will  be 
noted  that  a  detailed  analysis  in  connecton  with  the  cost  of  prod- 
uct and  general  expenses  shows  on  a  quart  of  milk,  actually  deliv- 
ered to  the  consumer,  a  profit  of  .003217  or  a  percentage  of  profit 
on  sales  of  3.5  per  cent.  This  is  of  course,  as  aforesaid,  on  the 
actual  quart  of  milk  sold,  and  a  proportionate  distribution  of  ex- 
penses to  each  product  on  a  point  basis.  The  supporting  schedules 
herewith  show  that  at  stations  which  have  not  been  thoroughly  or- 
ganized, or  where  perhaps  there  is  a  larger  territory  to  cover,  or 
where,  perhaps,  there  is  keener  competition  in  the  territory,  there 
is  a  proportionate  loss  on  the  sates.  It  also  shows  that  at  stations 
where  there  is  a  large  volume  of  business,  there  is  a  profit  in  some 
cases  of  over  a  half  cent  a  quart  on  every  quart  of  milk  sold.  It 
must  be  stated  that  a  profit  of  over  a  half  cent  is,  however,  the 
exception  rather  than  the  rule,  and  in  cases  where  this  is  shown, 
the  reasons  are  very  apparent.  On  the  contrary  these  same  profits 
are  not  apparent  at  branches  where  milk  is  sold  principally  at 
wholesale,  and  it  is  recommended  to  the  Committee  that  some  very 
valuable  information  might  be  obtained  by  the  testimony  of  those 
familiar  with  the  actual  reasons  for  such  condtions,  other  than 
the  fact  that  there  is  an  erroneous  distribution  of  cost.  The  de- 
ductions from  total  sales  represent  a  charge  of  one-fourth  of  one 
per  cent,  for  bad  debts  on  sales  which  it  is  fair  to  say  at  this  time 
has  been  found  insufficient,  the  rate  having  recently  been  increased 
to  $2.60  per  thousand  of  sales,  and  also  for  refunds  and  discounts. 

It  is  recommended  to  the  Committee  that  a  study  of  these  state- 
ments will  reveal  information  that  will  prove  instructive  and  in- 
teresting, as  they  have  been  prepared  at  a  very  great  expense  of 
overtime  study. 

EXHIBIT  No.  9 

The  statement  herewith  shows  the  same  figures  as  in  Exhibit 
No.  7  except  that  the  results  obtained  herein  are  for  the  Western 
branches.  The  profit  is  apparently  not  as  great,  due  to  the  fact 


413 

that  the  route  overhead  expenses  are  somewhat  higher  in  this  terri- 
tory than  in  the  Eastern  territory. 

EXHIBIT  No.  10 

The  statement  herewith  shows  the  same  information  for  the 
Western  branches  as  Exhibit  No.  8  does  for  the  Eastern  branches. 

It  will  be  noted,  particularly,  in  connection  with  the  Western 
branches  that  there  is  no  grading  of  milk  betirfeen  "  A  "  and  "  B  " 
as  exists  in  the  East.  It  will  also  be  noticed  that  there  is  a  greater 
percentage  of  profit  on  products  in  this  territory,  other  than  fluid 
milk. 

EXHIBIT  No.  11 

The  depreciation  charges  of  the  various  factories,  pasteurizing 
plants  and  branches  will  be  noted  to  be  reasonable  and  conserva- 
tive. The  valuation  of  these  plants  is  accepted  on  appraisal  by 
a  representative  appraisal  company  and  the  depreciation  charge 
is  based  on  said  appraisal.  Absolutely  no  exception  can  possibly 
be  taken  to  this  procedure  and  the  charges  and  cost  of  same  must 
be  considered  fair. 

EXHIBITS  Nos.  12  AND  13 

No  better  statement  could  be  prepared  to  show  the  expenses  of 
conducting  a  milk  business  than  is  shown  herewith  in  connection 
with  waste  at  pasteurizing  plants  and  at  country  factories. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  waste  in  country  factories  is  consider- 
ably lower  than  in  city  pasteurizing  plants,  which  perhaps  accounts 
for  the  increased  cost  of  production  in  the  latter.  Considerable 
study  could  be  given  to  the  accuracy  of  some  of  these  higher  per- 
centages of  waste,  and  it  is  recommended  here  that  your  Committee 
examine  witnesses  who  are  familiar  with  this  particular  feature 
of  the  milk  business.  In  particular  I  would  call  to  your  notice  the 
waste  on  No.  1  cream  and  route  cream  at  the  Long  Island  City 
pasteurizing  plant  which  may  be  accounted  for  in  the  transfer  to 
fluid. 

EXHIBIT  No.  14 

Tlie  profit  and  loss  statement  of  the  Borden  Condensed  Milk 
Company  attached  hereto  shows  a  net  income  for  the  year  of 
$3,002,432.43.  and  as  stated  in  the  report  of  this  examination,  ap- 
proximately seventy-five  per  cent,  of  it  is  made  on  fifty  per  cent. 


414 

of  the  sales  of  condensed,  malted,,  evaporated  milk  and  sundries, 
with  the  exception-  of  route  products.  It  must  be  said  at  this  time< 
that  the  administrative  charges  to  all  divisions  are  made  on  the 
basis  of  gross  sales,,  so  hhat  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  route 
division  makes  but  one-fourth  of  the  profit  of  the  company,  it  is 
charged  with  half  of  the  administrative  expenses.  While  the 
charges  to  surplus  for  reserves  of  $1,129,339.85  are  not  a  charge 
to  costs,  it  is  well  to  state  that  $1,000,000  of  this  amount  is  for 
reserves  on  obsolete  plants  of  the  company.  No  verification  of  thei 
value  of  obsolete  plants  has  been  obtained,  but  in  an  analysis  of 
the  plant  and  structure  accounts,  the  only  factories  listed  as  obso- 
lete consisted  of  buildings  and  machinery  at  Brewster,  Wassaic,, 
Granville  and  Middletown  showing  a  total  valuation  of  approxi- 
mately $381,402.86. 

EXHIBIT  No.  15 

The  balance  sheet  herein  shown  as  at  July  1,  1916,  for  the  Bor- 
den's  Condensed  Milk  Company,  all  departments,  excluding  affiliat- 
ed companies,  is  simply  shown  for  whatever  general  information 
may  be  contained  therein. 

EXHIBIT  No.  16 

The  profit  and  loss  statement  shown  herein  reflects  the  net  profit 
of  the  Farm  Products  Division,  both  East  and  West  branches,  in- 
cluding factory  sales,  and  is  supported  in  detail  in  the  schedules 
aforesaid. 

SCHEDULE  "  B  " 

As  per  your  instructions  the  names  of  route  factory  managers 
and  route  sales  managers  in  general  and  also  at  individual  fac- 
tories and  branches  are  attached  hereto,  together  with  the  names 
of  platform  men  at  railroad  terminals,  and  city  and  country  vet- 
erinarians. In  connection  with  the  subject  of  loans  and  commis- 
sions made  to  customers,  it  is  recommended  that  the  manager  of 
sales,  namely,  P.  D.  Eox,  or  any  division  superintendent  under 
the  heading  "  Route  Sales  Managers,  East,"  would  be  able  to 
give  considerable  information  as  witnesses  along  the  lines  men- 
tioned. 


415 

SCHEDULE  "  C  " 

In  accordance  with  the  verbal  instructions  of  the  counsel  of 
your  Committee,  Hon.  George  Ward,  I  am  attaching  hereto  list 
of  materials  and  quantities  of  each  used  in  the  various  ice  creams 
manufactured  by  this  company  for  the  months  of  June  and  July, 
1916.  If  the  actual  batch  sheets  are  desired  they  can  be  obtained 
from  any  of  the  factories. 


EXHIBIT  No.  i 

BOBDBN'S   CONDENSED   MILK   COMPANY  —  FARM   PRODUCTS   DIVISION,   EAST 
Reconstructed  Statement  of  the  Unit  Profit  on  470,463,698  Pounds  of  Milk  Pur- 
chased, Reduced  to  218,820,305  Quarts  on  a  Basis  of  2.15  Pounds  to  a  Quart 


Amount 

Unit  cost 

Amount 

Unit 
selling 
price 

Sales  

$17,580,269  78 

080341 

Cost  of  milk 

$8,062,763  33 

.036847 

Factory  expenses  
Freight  
Branch  selling  and  distributing 
expenses  
General  selling  expenses.  .  . 

2,700,582  70 
1,586,856  65 

4,133,400  36 
255,634  22 

.012342 
.007252 

.018890 
.001168 

General  administration  

203,106  13 

.000927 

Total  cost  and  expenses.  .  . 
Net  profit 

$16,942,383  39 
637  886  39 

.077426 
002915 

$17,580,269  78 

.080341 

$17,580,269  78 

.080341 

416 


a 

,1 


1 1 

s  'I 


§  1 
g  1 

a    S 


BO 
£ro 


^ 


I*li 


II  i| 


SIs 


i-i  O3  CSJ  00  >-i 

8 


oo;oo< 
ococo  t 

,-HCCO' 


<0rf  <NOO 
t"-  O  !>•  O  O 

»O  ^  GO  CD  O 


s 

o  

O    r-IOCJO< 


IS    3 


>O«C        t_COOOiC^H 

'?]         ^  K^S^          o 


g 


CT:  O  CC  O 
O  t-  <M  > 


r-(OOO>CO 
TtiOSC^I  (N  »C 

O^  CO  ^  t^  O 
COOOOSi^TO 


GO  <N  <N  1C  O 

COO5  r-icvS  S 
OOOt>iM 


«    s 

m          O 


•S      H 


SB 


;:§ 

&^. 

«1 


s  §§ 

r3  rA      P 


H  43^3 

fH-O 

« 


I 

o     ^ 

g  I 


I  III  1  II 


3 
•j3  e.    JQ^  ft 


41'f 


EXHIBIT  No.  2 

BORDEN'S   CONDENSED   MILK   COMPANY  —  FARM   PRODUCTS   DIVISION,   EAST 

Statement  of  Unit  Profits  on  470,463,698  Pounds  of  Milk  Purchased,  Reduced  to 

218,820.305  Quarts,  on  a  Basis  of  2.15  Pounds  of  Milk  to  Quart 


Amount 

Unit  cost 

Amount 

Unit 
selling 
price 

Sales  

$17,580,269  78 

.080341 

Cost  of  milk 

$8,062,763;  33 

.036847 

Factory  expenses  
Freight  .  . 

2,767,008  82 
1,586,856  65 

.012646 
.007252 

Branch  selling  and  distributing 
^  expenses  
General  selling  expenses 

4,133,400  36 
255,634  22 

.018890 
.001168 

General      administration      ex- 
penses 

203,106  13 

.000927 

Total  coat  and  expenses.  .  . 
Net  profit  

$17,008,809  51 
571,460  27 

.077730 
.002611 

$17,580,269  78 

.080341 

$17,580,269  78 

.080341 

418 


3 


Unit  cost, 
December 


"i-iCy     •  Ci     •  (N  C^ 
-<N<N     -<N     •Tjnoc 


|^Tt<<NTj<(Nr-IOO<NI 
>  O  O  O  O  O  tH  CO  •*  < 


O  CC  «O  t-  CO  »O  i-i  N       ^i       iHOO<N<N 
i-lrH         CD  •*         O5^*         00  lOrHTH 

5COCO<MOO  (NrH 


S  00  O  OO  CD  I-H  »O  Tj<  O5  r-t  00  t»       OSt^OOl^-CO 
O  K  CD  i-l  00  <N  CC  I-H       «-Hr-l       r^  00  <N  ( 


CO  «C  O  00  i-l 


i-l  t-       «C<I       iH 


£8S 


sss; 

rH*rH*00 


liCOOOS^QOO 
S  CD  O  1-1  O  t>  «0 


CCOO5'~fCO 


o£ 

^20 

-uja 


:J) 

:^,^2 


:  :-g  :  :-g-8  :  :  : 

•  -.a   •   -^5^3   •   •   • 


1 


«8 


:J5    :g 


».4S^^ST3      fe  c  d  efl  d 
5+iji-ut:      cscfc  -"S.S 

t»  S  3  S  3  CT'C'Ci  S  >,  « 


1 

~ 


.1- 

S£ 

Hi- 


o6S5CSc> 
£fc<;SPUfc 


419 


r-i  •*  co  co  i 
cs  t~  ooe  ; 

t^mo-^ 


§! 


Tf^HOSOcDt^-^'-lTfcOt^OCOTtK 
t^io  n  <N  03  IH  T}< 


>CO       ^(TJio^COCOiO^CDCOCO 
CO 


Sjj 


t-*»»Mi 

' 


420 


g 

9 

^<o 
«- i 

2  7 

g  a 

£    OS 

Q  ^ 

CQ       ^ 

o  £ 

p  ^ 

co    £  £ 

s  ^ 
o    «  - 

^  pS  ^ 

H     I    1 

"     gS 
§    § 


M     3 

d  -I 

SI 
1> 

^(      ?^ 
H      s 

g  I 

O      § 

"^ 


^ 

•*iCO<NOiOTj< 
*^(MTtiT-i<N<Ni-« 


CCCCiC 
OiHrH 


NOW«OWOO 


•*     -  1—  I      -CO 
--*     -O     -OC 


o  cc  < 

^  lO  I 

OO 
O  O  - 


•  i-<  f»5 
'°(N 


Tt^C^TfOOOOO^fOOCOiC^O^i—  I»-HCCC^OI—  *CMOOCCTfi-^ 
O  O  O  •*  i-<  <N  TH  CO  O  W  <N  O  <N  O  O  O  i-i  CO  C  CO  O  O  (N  CO  -# 


5  05  «2  ^H  05  •*  T*  O5  CO  IN.  •*  O  i-i  O  •*  l^»  CO  "2  t^  00  i-l  »O  i-( 
OOTtiiCO:''-'(MTfl^.^.^OOTf^-iOiTj(Tt<  OCCINi-IO 
i-i  -^  i-i  O  CD  O  »O  t>  O  OS  i*  i-H  CO  O  i-H  I-H  l>COt>OOC<J 


i-iO5'-iO3O'i«cc<ic<icoocoooTf  cot>Tj'  10  o  O5  o  o      oo  <NOO  o 

INrHiCCO       (NOOr-iI>cOOOCC»Ot^       (Nr-t^-^TH  rt^^HTHti 

rH  COC<ieO  i-i       i-l       00«O  ^  CO 


Illls 

O^P-iOO*-5 


12        S     - 

-2      "S     o 
fe      W    !^ 


:a 

•    Oj 


1 1 

I  Ullll^lT. 

O          3      ,2    "3  03  P'3'3  3  o  *      ^       S. 


PH       « 


421 


00  »O  O        i-H  <M  <N  CO 

-       CO  CO*-<OCO     -00 

g||§c^2co  "° 

oot>ico 


422 


g 

| 

"3 

X3 

M 

•     ••*       00 

8 

1 

.     .g 

.     .    •     .«,     .    .00     - 

'oo^ScoS 

00 

j 

|  • 

:   °l 

:  :  :   *  :  :*  : 

Si'^^r? 

co  IN 

\ 

I 

'2 

rH                O 

°. 

\ 

f 

•  • 



CO 
rH 
0» 

2 

J 

11 

.    -co 

•     •       (NOS       iHN 
COO       I>CO 

•            OO       OW 
COOS       (NO 

•^  CO  00          O          O  r* 

OC'  O  C<l     •  iO  CO  t>- 
OOOO5     -^ti  1C  00 

rH«5l>-      -O5O5  CO 

co 

O05 

coo 

1 

P 

it 

i   s 

^ 

rHOO 

8 

?s?. 

i  as 

S 

O 
H 

40-quart  cans 

<O-*#  CO 

^M^J  j  ^^^ 

0 

«» 

PPP  I 

So-*     «•«** 
osos     t>t^ 

•*  00t>-         t>  rH 

oco 

O5  O 

^    o  £ 
*0| 

*       M    -G 

5    3  ft, 

1*£ 

Ife 

EXTRA  Hi 

I 

s^s 

00       i—  1 

IN  OSt>-»O  M       »O  o 

rH 
•I 

iO  00  CO  iN  CO  -^h  ^H       »O 
t^»  ^  CO  t**  O  *O  CO       Is* 

rH  TjH  00  »-l  i-l  O  N.         C^ 

Si  p 

oo  rH 

OS  rH 

oo" 

J        fa    *^? 

>P 

H    0-| 

-i    02  e 

r§j 
5  I* 

1 
1 

H 
P 

jl 

t>t~^ 

ScoS 

oo"    "*~ 

OOCO  i-lM  00       i-lt^ 
1O                           iO 

W^C^S^rH?          S 

|o°°Mco2co     8 

-3  is 

t^oo 

Ml 

•i  «! 

fts 

•to 

1 

.    .    .  ^    .    .    .    . 

:  :  :  o  :  :  :  : 

ill 

I  S  §*  •::•••  8 

•  .5  -a   .... 

:  :||  :;::  : 

:  :|s  :  :  :  : 

i&Ig1     :i 

I 

*••  tw-*^ 
Fluid  usedrpounds.. 
Fluid  waste,  pounds. 
Production,  quarts  .  . 

'S'S  0   &&§* 

tfiiltili! 

0  0^  §  ®  ®  §  *  &S 

ultfirHil 

-H-  g>M^  >  M-g-£  C 

g  g.a  a  i,*a.9  9  °*  * 

Buttermilk  making  e 
Packing  and  loading 
Washing  and  sterilizi 
Froth  butter  
Skim  
Total  expenses  . 
Unit  cost  

Total  value  and  expe 
Unit  cost  

423 


0-quart  c 
quarts 


CO  •**<  00  r-l  M 

i-i  CO  O 
00>OCCa»O 


1C  I-H  i-H 

N 


:sss 


CO  (NO 

C5  rH  -^ 
t~         t» 


Gi  Ci  rH 
CO  r-i  CM 


l 

it 


cTco 


r-  1  i—  1  Oi  rH  O  O5  O 
O 


<N»Oi-l 


)IOC5( 
•00-^*  rH> 


N       •  •  -OSrH  ICCN  OS 

»O     •  •  -COCO©       O 

S-  •  'MOrH         rH 

•  •  •  rH 


(MOiCt^TfTtiCTiOOC^OM 


<N       i-KN       «Or-lC<ICO 


!2Iloc5< 


(rHIOrHINt^ 


sgss§3?i: 


12 


irs 
e  ex 

se 
se 


cts 
nd 


ng  bo 


Hillillll 

=  tNittiflii 

§  illliClnls. 


\m 

X      .   o   0?^ 

!«:ifl 

'glQ^^ 

83    O   b    (4    M 

»-r>    O    O     O 

3'S    . 


II!!! 


I  S'S-'a-a 

H^PPP 


424:. 


?  II 

Us 

M       ^* 

w  g-g 
S  §'t 

O     H    § 

gs 

'      o  CQ' 
w  O  e 


Sco'Cj. 
CQO5. 
00  OOO 

»Oi-iO 
<N    •    <N 


gsc 
^ 

•-HCO 


00  IN  t>-  • 

co'rf  eo.i>  •*-  • 

CDCO^lMt^  • 

IM  OOO  r-l  • 


IOIM 

CC  t^CO 

iCCOrfi 
OOO 


lOCOCO 

CD-lOr-l 

CO 

COOO>H 

(N  O5  O 
r-(  O 


OCOOrH 

-t-llNO 

•         rtO 


CO  CO  O  >O  OS-CO  iO 
(N  1O  <N  Oi  1C  t^  CO 

I><£>00 

O  t^  »-i  CO  O5  rt*  Tt* 
CO  <-i  C<1  I-H  (M  CO  •* 


OO(N 
OO 
OO 


O  i-l  r-t  OS  O  t»  O  -l^'OO 

ca  oo  •*  oo  c>i  o  co  -icco 

COINl^  •       O> 

t^  CD  CO  b-  CO  O  00  -rH-OO 

00  CO  •*  (M  CO  (N  O5  '"5O 

OJOOO-tO  IN.iO  ••^O' 


•  -00>*i<NC<M 

•  •  T^  IQ-^1  ^*  < 

•  •  OCOO       ( 


•00-*  (N  <N  t^ 

•  •<*«  tO  •"*!  TJH  00 

•OCOCO       CO 


<i-HOOtO>-ftOO^HCOi-li-l 
-O5       <N  r-t  O  t^  (Nl>  rj<       C 


CO  CO  (N  O  i-i  O5  IO 
»O  •*  CO  O  CO  lO  (M 


O  t^  O5       i-l 


(N  (N  OOOiOOO 
iOb-t>Ot>OO 

COCO  Tf  I>  r-HO 


(NrH  rH         (NrH 


r-iOO'-IOO 


COt-l  i-H       Wi-l 

09 


•  CO 

•  CO 


Ot^COIMOO'O 
•<*  •*  00  rt<  •«*<  rt* 

CO  O  rH  b-  CO  00 

(N  CO  rt*  C35  CO  Tj< 


- 


$6,150  18 
.029274 
.032864 
.023816 


0  a  lliii 


425 


o    I  *• 


5  g'g 

M  O    viT 

w  °  ^ 

w  S  I 

h  S.J 

O  Q  to 


MS 


02 


I 


1 

£ 
<< 

K 

40-quart  cans 
quarts 

1 

flip 

2 

1 

£ 

r-TOC  COCO 

I-H  co  N»C 

1 

i-Hb-Cq  <N 

b.  Tf   *#   CO 

ooooo 

Oti-iOOOO'^l»OlN<N 

00  Tt<  N  00  Tt<  O  b»  CC 
OS  CO  00  I-H  IN  CD-iHrut 

1 

10 

i 

*Quart  .Ipottles, 
quarts 

sii 

IT! 

•8"  ' 

^HCO     -CgOO 

i-H  lO       •  CD  i-H 

<N(N       •<*§ 

gsss00 

OOOOi-H 
iO  O  <N  <N  <N 
1-1  lO  i-HC<l  O 

00^     •       CT 

N^  :   g 

83  :   B 

8     : 

1 

C0>0b- 
00  >O  CO 
rJ«NCO 

ITI 

g 
1 

CCININO 

CD  1C  00  C^  b-  00  CO  •*  CO 

Ci  lO  CO  OC.lN  OS  O  O5  00 
IO  <N  00  O  <N  CO  1-1  N  b- 

CD 
OS 

1 

i-H               (N 

& 

1 

1 
•1 

| 

i 

S  : 

•C30CCOCO 
•  iCiOiOb- 

**rH                                        TO 

S 

1 

b-  • 

•COINCOCT 

i 

i-H               (N 

i 
1 

OOOOOb- 
CO^OOICDO: 

b-  00  10  CO  ^H 

^^co^S 

•*  i-HOO 

"* 

S 

1 



:::::::. 

i 
i 

^c 

i 

Fluid  waste,  pounds  
Production,  quarts  

c 

1 

lance  

i  § 



Unit  cost  of  overhead  and  bott 
fipnprn.l  fn.ct.nrv  p.xnpnsp. 

General  factory  repairs  and  maintei 
Teaming  and  stable  expense  
Power  house  expense  
"Receivine"  exnense.  .  . 

Bottling  expense  
Packing  and  loading  route  products 
Washing  and  sterilizing  bottles  and 
Total.  . 

1 

'1 

P 

I 

§ 

• 

1! 

V  +• 

fs 

II 

Unit  cost  for  December,  1915.  .  . 
Unit  cost  for  June,  1916  
Unit  cost  of  bottles..  . 

Unit  cost  :  .  . 
Unit  cost  for  December,  1915. 
Unit  cost  for  June,  1916  
Route  overhead  
Depreciation,  bottles  
Depreciation,  cans  
Total 

426 


E 
CO 

Wa 


SC 
BO 
of 


Raw  fluid, 
0-quart  cans, 

quarts 


<M  O  O  O  CO  <N  00 ! 

s" ' ' '-"  " 


OCC<I  00  CO 

1>T*!  T}<  00 

>oooo 


s 


Jf55 


427 


S     < 
B  §1 
q  o  1 

B*j 

«  §••§ 

«2     o     S 


Q 


CM  rHOO 
1C  W 
00  CO 


Tj<  1C1C 

St-H  1C 
00 

CO         tH 


t^-  00  CM  CO  b- 00  O     •< 
CJOOOC^CD  •< 


b.  00  CN  -tf  1C  CO  CD  •  t>  < 

O5  <N  t-      _  •   < 

cc  co -f  (M  o  co  •<*<  -r-< 

CDOCOCNOCM  ••»*!< 


CO 


•  co 


>h-C:<N 

JrHOJi-l 

•  CO       i-l 


COOOt^OlN 
OOO'-'Oii-H 
OJt^CO  i-< 

rHIN  1C 


t-cMCCOOOCDr^C 


<  1C  O  CO  CO  CO  OC  **l  CO 


CO  CO  OC  **l  CO     • 
"*  CO  O  CO  T}<     • 


i—  (CNTHCOt^^G^OTj* 
03  CO  i-l  <N  IN  O5  •<**  CO  CO     • 


i-O  ^  O^ 
00  CO  CD  »C 

(NcoK^H 
CO  O  O  O 


00 1C  1C  CM  00 

^  Tt^  I-H  CO  CO 

CD  O5  COCO 
00  00  1C  O3CN 


pounds 
,  pound 
quarts 


:  !^2  : 

:  jlj: 

:  'Q^ 


te  pr 
bottl 


, 
ast 
ion 

uid 
st 


i^lllIJ 


w 
uct 


aa^   §z^^-§""i 
111  i^s-ggfli 

ESf^    >p^p«Qpf 


|j|ls';  liirf 

mpffih 
li'firns! 

C  S3  c«  i  «iio  3 

«  cu  8>  ocd  o  S>5 
OOHA,:  «fc^ 


ii!|! 

315S5 


val 
u 


y 

cos 
cos 


'rt'C-+J^ 
H  -a  ."^  ."Ji  .'tn 

o  «  o  a  a 
EH^Hppp 


428 


£     e 
S    $2 


§  I 
•I 

$  2 

Q      ^ 


OQ 


O 

! 


O'-* 

' 


.  O5  rH  ^1  -^  t^  35 

'00'^  ro  Tfi«3  ^ 
)  -H  C^  >-(  •*  t^  00: 
O  O  O  C"*"l> 


•***  to  TT*  !>•  ^'?0  ^ 

SSSSSS^ 


5 1»- CO  00' 

r-t  ^  r> 

iO       CO 


-OOCit^COOO 

•  Tt<  CO  I-t  -^  N. 

•&» oo »o     co 


>n  o  co  10  co< 

O  i-l  »C  C5>O< 
OOCO  <N 


MTH  i-l        i-KNIN^j 


SfeS^^^SS^g  : 

C^oSoSS^^^tN     • 


r^Tti  i 

CD  CD  OO  < 
Tt<C3O< 
<N 


CD! 
f  00  <N  5 

»-l  N  CO  iM  ( 
1>OOO< 


i'1^ 


ill- 
Si 

SSA; 


:|S 

:g^  ^g  .  .5    a 

'  o  £     t§  S  g   '  M      S 
'  *>  S^<  o  o 

•P^^- 

^^Ili 


g  :^2  • 

tiisi 
l& 


429 


l! 

- 


8    § 


>MO 

ICM-O 

<     c 


OO       OS  <N O  --i  CO  00 10  <£>  •-! 


—  —  :  - 
<N  -<i*Tt<< 

>ooo< 


S-      ^    '"^ 


Ol  O  I-H  ^ 
3OrtiOO<-' 


!  O  O)  1C  OC  C5  C5 

•  c^  c;  c^  IN  oo  M 


430 


SCHEDULE  8  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  4 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  —  BARTON 
Summary  of  Production  and  Cost  Showing  Unit  Costs,  Fiscal  Year  1915-1916 

Raw  fluid, 
40-quart  cans, 
quarts 

gg| 

^      CD 

rH 

Tjl         1C  COr-ICS  O 

>-H>  (>.  C35  «0  (N  00  (N 

O5  CO  •*  iM  (N  (M  Tf  O 

r= 

i 

(NWt^OO 

•*oco 

C5  00  CD  00 
OOOr**  00 

o  oo  Tt<  co 

•3 
1 

:  :  : 

•* 

CD 
00 

•l-H  C5  O       • 

•1OCMOO     • 

I 

•Si 

ooo  •<*< 

<N 

I  i  i 

S© 

1 

1 

0 

S 

•i-HO:  O     • 
•>O<MOO     • 

IS 

O  0s  00  CD 
OOCD<N<N 

(MOO  10 

CO      c: 

00     • 

S        : 
I        1 

:  :  : 

2 

co 

iSSl  i 

3 

I 



oo 
I" 

OOOSO 

r-100  i-H 

OCCCCO 
O  t^»  £•» 

l^OOO 

*''     \ 

;    ; 

i  i  ;  i      1    I    i    ;  if  ;  i  i  i  ; 

T3         •  §         •    •    •         •  ^    

j;l  1  ;li.  !  •iii  i 

I     •-<    .       .     •?             «                  .  o-r;    . 

Total  value  and  expense  
Yearly  unit  cost  
Unit  cost  for  December,  1915..  .  . 
Unit  cost  for  June,  1916  

:      :    »  :          s 

General  factory  expense.  . 
General  factory  repairs  and 
Teaming  and  stable  expens 
Hauling  expense  
Power  house  expense  
"Receiving"  expense  
Bottling  expense  
Pasteurizing  expense  
Packing  and  loading  route 
Washing  and  sterilizing  bol 
Total  
Unit  cost  

Fluid  used,  pounds.  . 
Fluid  waste,  pounds. 
Production,  quarts.  . 

.     ^ 

DrH                       "S 

?   -  '         o 

Value  milk  
Unit  cost  
Unit  cost  for  Dect 
Unit  cost  for  June 
Route  overhead.. 
Depreciation  .... 
Total  
Unit  cost  of  r 

431 


ic3£ 

•  CO  CO 

rco*v 


O  i-l 'H  O>  • 
GOt^COi-Hi 

>  CO  •*  IM  C 
)  OOO 


IN  COCO 
<NI>CO 


823 

^§ 


$23^ 
§r 

5! 


M  O5  CO  ^H  O  CO 
(NOOiQObicOC 

OiOOCOCOO"2 

i-H  |>  lO  O5  i-H  Tjl 

ThCO  IN 


00<N 

i-HCO 


oo 

<N 


£ 


cq  co 

-ico 


03OINOOCOOS 

»— *  i-H  CO  C<l  i-H  i-H  O 

3COOCCOOCO 
3  Tf  <N  TJ<  <N  t>. 

>OOO3t^-<M 


!>••*  i-t 
CO  CO 


3O  O5  00  CO  ( 
CO  i-l  O  t>- 


JH 


3  :§ 

CO     -t>- 


i-l  (M  CO  Tt<  U5  O5  <N  OS  «5  N  I-H 

r-H  CO  O5  CO  CO  (N  t^  Tj<  CO  I-H  O 

CO  O  »O  00  Tf  00  OS  CO  l>       iCi 


ST}<  os  co  <N  co  co  o  Tt<  10  co -^  t>.  oo  e<i  TH 
COOSi-iiOO^COOINOO^OOOOCOOS 

CD  C 

r^ 

•^ 


COCOi-HQOOO-^'COt~OSNi-<T-iiMTj((N(M 
TflT^ts.iOiCt^CNIOO  CM^HOOiOt^Tfl 
00  "5  CM  IO  i-H  lO  (N  i-H  i-H  «O  »O  00  >O  CO 


:  :  :     :  :£S 

.  .  .     .  ..g« 

II   ^  ^i§  iSi 


jSijij 
»tiifi 


a     -«    '«2<2  >-  °  ° 

3       -s     .««««  tDTVr! 


§  in 


iii 


«'I1|  :•§ 


5    S^^^g^'-S^-S^  ^^^Sg 

'5    a§§§o.s.2.s|-a  i^lj5! 

•^s-  iiiiifSiu^^jij- 

QQ  OOHWfS:  pq^Mfflpq^^c 


!« 


•a-s^    3^1IIIHP    !  ill  II 

'33  P    -i-a-a-aSS-g'S'         Sil2iJ: 

S 


:-oo 

Isl 


j  11^ 


«^ji* 


lisss 


432 


OUliJcJJJUlvJii  V  UU  JLLiAJXlJOiJ.  J.1  ^.  T:  V,  w  uiii/i/H'U,&u/  j 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 
Production  Cost  of  Milk  and  Cream  at  Hopewell  Junction  Station,  Fiscal  Year  1915-1916 

11 

CM 

t& 

•  '—^ 

i! 

:8 

•*           -00 
03          -CO 

CM 

i1"* 

CM           -Tt< 

•  •  _^ 

IP 

<M 

Ot^CO 

3i(NO 
i-l  COO 

OCOCO 

il 

OOO    CM 

COCO    0) 

jl 

;;;;;§. 

s 
•< 

H 

B 

<< 
M 

1 

40-quart  cans 
quarts 

"NCCCO 
i>iooo~ 

3 

i>         i> 

§I>COO>rJ< 
CO-*  CM  CO 

O 

"il 

CO  C^  Tfi  CO  00  l>  Oi     •« 
OC  t~  O  O  lO  C5  i-H     -OC 

>C  i-H  OJ  1C  t>  i-H  i-H       •« 

O    OJ 

Jq 

1C  O3  O 

IO       CD 

pil 

t»i-i 

OJOiCO 

coo 

U5  00  CO  (N  CO  rf<  rH       u; 
t^  rj<  CO  t>  O  >O  CO       l> 

lOiOOCOOOOlO       K 
COCOiHCOTt<rHCO        Tf 

11 

§'°1 

M 

.00"    •* 

OOCOOOCDrHfN 

•O  iO<N 
00  00  t^  CD  O5  •* 

OOOOO 

^28 

C35  00  CO  Tf  r-4  ^H  OS        tf 
COCOCOOINr-lTfl         IT 

»C  Tfl  CO  i-l  i-H  O  l-H         Cf 

CO  IO       CM  CO  rH  CO       C\ 

•Oi    O 

•rH      0 

•i-l    CM 

itenance.  .  .  . 

ny| 

'     '     '          .                    o3 

:  :  :     .   &     a  : 

Butter  making  expense  
Buttermilk  making  expense.  .  .  . 
Packing  and  loading  route  prodi 

Washing  and  sterilizing  bottles  s 

"iii    sli^i  -:  b&li^NS1] 

a^&     XKdrf.i  l3||^0l^ 

.^|g   ^   5111.0.0.:  8    llltistl* 

Hi  iii^llli-a  iiii^lrli 

^^^     «^^«*gg£^P     fcfe's^^Sillj 

^^P       'c^CCfiO^aJO                  dj  Q;  aj  c3  Q  p^  O  %3  i 

433 


oo 


Tf1  i-H  i-H  T-H  C 

CO  O  O  O  < 

s  ' 


lCi-Hi-1 

«°° 


OC30C 

06  go 


00  CD  i-H  l> 
t—  TMOJ  O 

CJi-tfHO 


o-ci 

KM  O 


§    -.jo  2  o 
a  : 


434 


EXHIBIT  ~No 
MILK  COMP 
pot  Station,  F 


ED 
De 


BORDEN'S  CONDE 
Milk  at  Washingt 


40-quar 
qua 


Quart  bo 
quart 


§£§ 

ooo  co 


ooo 

l>iC 


>O  ^  •<*<  Oi  i-<  O  i-l 


c<i  »o 

OOlO 


8 


-co  Oeo 

•lO'CC* 

i"H 

-^(N  rH 

-i-l  O3O 
•  0 


s 


OSiO  O     ••«M 

O  CO  "<*l 

i-ir-i         -(N 


rf  00  00  l>  rj*  00  00 
C5<N       COCOCMC^ 


»O     -<N05 

(N     "(NCO 

CM     -t-lO 


1C  00  IN  i-H  t>  CO  i-l  -I>OSCOCO 

CO<NiCOt^Ot^  -rHOOt>iN 

(N(MOCOOSCCr-i  -C^OOOSOS 

r-IUsS       CHINOS  -iCt^iOO 


rj<  CO  i-l  «5  CM  CO  ^  CO  »C  >C  T}<     • 

i-l  00  ^f  t^  OS  «O  CO  •*  1C  OS  O     • 


i- 

O  t-  •• 

1C  <N 


COOOCO     • 
S  1C  •*  »C     • 


ri       t-li-H       CO       CNNOO- 


i  O  CO  *O  C^  00 


CO  CO  i-l  CO  rj<  CM  CO 


,  pounds 
te,  pound 
n,  quarts 

d 


mm 

.  oj  w     .  o  o  J3 

•0,2^^-Q  § 


:SS-£gg§ 

•g|§  3^55 Illl' 

"1    s^lllll, 

11  W 


1$  sil 


OS  Ol  CO  CO  CO 

c>i  coi-i  10  ^ 


3 


^    ^«i^. 

fl          03    3    TO    1C 


435 


OS     -OJ     -OCO— (CO 

T-H       •  1-H       •  1-H  T}H  IQ  CO 
-       •!-<       -I-HOOO 


Tjl       -Tt<        -TtHOOCO          00  <-«       -O3' 

00     -00     •OO'OOt^'OCO     -00< 


00  <M  t-H  O 
05 


COCOOS^H 


i-iOOOOC  C5 
O5  CO  OCC  (M 


C5U3CON 

00  00  CO  O 
>OT*IO**< 


1C  iOt^t>- 

OOO3  OO 
1C  00»H  TJ<  ( 
CO  <N  COIN 
t^OOO 


Oi-i 
O 


^- 


w.-n>o 

00  »O  i-l  i-l 


)  1C  CO  00 
l-tfCiO 

>  co  i-H  co 


rfi  to  coco 

N.  LO  l-H  CO  C<1 

O51O  CCTj<  O 

t^oooo 


8iOt^ 
O 

OTJH"      lO 


000  00  »0  CO 
00  CO  i-l  i-l  O 


^  t^-  O  t^»  t>-  ^     •  O 


o>o       -as 


8*    '  D. 


:^ 


lill 


lidlillli 

i5^§«§-Sp.§l 


s_2e£2  -a- 


= 

•s-siS-99  i 

DGDOOO  OOHlSiS:  t 


ls-3-si 


436 


zing  Plant,  Fiscal  Year  1915  1916 


(Continued 
sla  City  Pa 


BIT  ~No.  5 
Unit  C 


w 

X 

w 


ng 


S 


Ice  m 

factu 


R 


Extra  hea 
cream 


CO  rH       •      -CO 

<M  rft    •     •  <M 

0000     •     -CO 


-(NO 

'cnS 

•  r-l-rfl' 

-o    • 


CO  OOCO 

rH        t^< 
<N         rH- 


rH  O  CO  1C  rH 
CO  CO  CO  CD  O 
CO  Tf  1C  COO 

CO~rHO~tO~<N 


s  grs 


S^O5 

sis 


I-IC5C2CO       •  ^  CO  Ti<  rH  t> 

1>-  (N  O  LO     •  C5:>C  1C  O)  •* 


rH  t>  b-       -OU 


N  CO  r-l     -lOiO 

O       'COO 


:§S 


lOCOOOOOrHt^OOCOrH 
CS  CO  l^  >0  r-i  -tf  t-.  O5  <M  C 


t^t^-^^ 

OCt^COCO 


CO  CO  t^-  M      •  CO  <M  !M  1C  CO  •  •  t> 

00  rff  O  O  .    •  CO  O  CO'O  Tj*  •  •  Tfri 

OOOSrt-CO     •  O  CT>  CO'r-l  (N  •  -rfil 

- 


5r-ICClCOOt^  •  •* 

0  •*  r-i  (N  CN  CO  -rt<OS 

0>C(MOO     -rHQOCOOOOO  •»» 

COCOdrH       •  <M  (M  XC  •<*•«**  rH  •  rH  O 


O  l>  CO  GO  •  GO  ' 

wSooS  -icosco^ooo-  -co'i 

^-I^^TflrH  •  Tf  rH  <N  1C  >C  rH  -O< 

--    "5M<^  -OlCCOrHrHCO  •  CO  I 

lOrH  •rHrHCNrHfNtN-  -OK 


-CO  rH 
1H  O  >C  Tfl 

1C  CO  ^  CO 


-:::::-«:::: 

:  ^  :::::: 

1  :  |  h'  j  H  1  1  :  |  j  H 

73  i  •  Q  •  •  •  ?*-g  •  81  •  • 

•     'OS     • 

i*f!a'    ;  i 

«3    I 

•  fe  -<  •  •  •  a  s 

.:  isj.:  ;|  § 

.  .  Q)  flj  +i  g  00  2  K 

•  •  9  a  5  5f  M  S  fl> 

fli  .  O  t5  O  O  crt  O) 

|  .Q£^§!  >, 
g  :hhS9S-S8  ° 

gg  .g  .  .  .|,o  .«  •  .  . 
£  x  :  §,  :  :  •'  g  g>  :  g  :  : 

and  expense, 
cost  
>r  December,  : 
)r  June,  1916. 

2?  a 


:S 


437 


§•  CO     •  CO  "*l  fO  <N     •     •  OC  00  1C 
•o    -O^ICCD    •    -coco^t* 


.<NCOrH  •  -OOOO 
5-*>OTfi  •  -t^t^ 
OOO  •  • 


•«*  oco 

SO  CO  N 


.-co 

icooi>    -CO^H    -ooco 


t^  -Is-  •  t^  CO  CO  <N  rH  OO 

i-H  -I-I  •  ^H  n  1C  ^  O5  •* 

IO  -1C  •  »C  r-(  iO  C<J  00  •* 

1C  -U5  •  1C  (N  (N  CO  t^- Tj< 

r-l  -1-H  -r-lO:OO!>CO 


r-iOJIM      -»C  00     -< 


OOO(N 
O5  O  t^  ^ 


•IN  O     - 

§IC       - 
O     - 


Oi  O5  Ci  O  00 
OOCO1OCO 


•CiCOrHCO 

•CM  rHOOCM 

•ICOOO-* 
••^  C<1  CO  O 
•OOCO  rHCO 


•(MOO         r-t 

•00  05 


t^iC-CNtiOt^ 


•ICCOO-* 
•r}<  (N  COO 

•OOCOrHCO 


8rH( 
OC 


CO  O  •*  N  CO  O5.OS  Oi     •  O 

>C  t-T-iooiTf-tv.^    -o 

OirH-i-IO  CO  CONJOIN       •  rH 


s  s 

all- 


jc^ 
lEHT^P^^ggg^P 


438 


«5     -»O     -»C' 


•       CO 

1C     -»C     ->C  TJ< 

OS      -O5      -O5O 

g   ;g 


•  q«c 

•<NCC 


T-ICOOOCOOCO 
U5rHCOCOCO^I 


S8 


S3- 


OOr-lOO 

I0t^«0 
»C<N  O5CO 


OOOiO 
(NCO«0 


00i-l( 


1^2 


(i-HOCOIXN 


OOi-H  O5        OON  M  r-l 


•*^-HOCOOi-l 

•^  cooo     t-co 


1C  CO 

si 


f 


SS! 


1C  --I  t^  »C 
lC  CO  O>H 
•*  »C  CO  <-l 


ot^ooo 

Slis 

OCO1*  CO 


•*  O5  Tf  i-l 

(N  --H  -^  I-H 


CO 

<N 


S"-& 


B*:-ii::l^ 

£  S  • 


iilfs  sill- 

»?3^'*3     D  fe  •§  d ' 


5»-i    . 

,005      . 


I  Hii 


..ssSSJl'iil* 

'  c  «  o  d 


I  -s-s-a 
^  &^^ 


311^3 


... 

O  fl  fl 


439 


OS 


o   d 


H  iJ^^ 

Pill 


s 


18° 
55 


OTfoo<Nccoco»o 

ETj<  i-H  IO  •<*<  i-H  •*  rH  00 
C*COO«5'OO<  1 


''OCO'-l-H  N        rH        N  •<* 

JCOi-HrMOO 


(IOCS     •  O  N  ^H  Tj<  CO  CJ  CO  N  •<**  •*  CO  O>  »O  •*     -N 
IrHOO     •  CO  Ti«N  CO  CO  r-l  i-l  •*  T}<  C  O  C 


-t>-     • 

-O     • 


<N  CD  1C  CD  -<1«N  iO  CO  O  O5  CO  CD 


OC5IMr-(( 
tOiOOOO< 


>CM'-lCNt^OOOOOOOO'-!COCNCOC''JOO»Q 

—  ^  — IIMCD     ioco^-tio.-ii> 


Jt-CDiOCOrH 

?  co'co'rHOO  Nt^M 


COiHlxNCDi-li-lCOCO 


O5  lOcO'^Oi'rt  "3  lOCNCOOCDcO  O  l>  l>  N  b-       CD  lO  00  O  CD  > 
^HC 

Sl 


i-i  (N  CD  OS  t^  ^t1  CO  O>  O>  O  CO -^  CO  CO  CO  CM  00 
05CO-*COCO<NCO^-ICDCOT}<rt*iCli-lt^ 
CM  t^  00  CO  OO  CO  CM  i-iWCN  iH 


00  <N  t^  CO  t*  O  O  (N  i~t  CO  •OOCDr-ccDCDCOOJOOCOO'HCOO  • 
CMO5'-IC35C<lTrl<MCNOt>  -t»<NCOCN<-li-Hr>-^!NTf*00<NOO<N  • 
"3  t>-  •*  O  CD  »O  O5  "3  CO  CO  •  CM  O  •*  CO  CO  CO  CO  i-l  OJ  i-l  CNJ  T*<  CD  t>-  • 


I  O  OOOCO     • 
ICOOb-iH     • 


440 


d 


s  and  Unit  Cost, 


DEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 
ng  Hartford  and  Buffalo}  Showing  C 
fiscal  Year  1915-1916 


BO 

lud 


B 


E 


S 


I  J 


tal  cost 
and 
xpense 


Administrative 
advertisine  and 
general  selling 
expense 


Route  sales 
overhead 


CM  IQ  co  rH  M  I-H  c:  C5  •*  co    •  co  co  ca  ic  N  05  o  ©  co  ^  ^t  cc  TJ<     ccocno 

>-l  •  rH  rH     •    C»t~         rH  1C  CN  rH 


OO^r^rHrf<NO5NrH 


COiCTfirH^iOOCrHrOT^OSOOOiOCO-^rHIM        1C  CM  00  CO  CO       COCO1 
«*05OCO-*COOOcOO<NrHO"#COI>COrHO       COCOCO       rH  Tj* 


§<N  O5  1C  03  O  rH  <N  CO 
<N  »C  00  CO  CO  r-< 


OC  CO  rj<  O5 
'-H'OOCO 
N.Tti^»C 

ooeo'Ci> 

O<-i  OO 


CO  C<1  C1  1-1  N  CO  W  O5  T)<  W5  •*  CC  O5  O5 

COt^rf<NCOOOOOCOttHl>eO(MCNCO 
OOCD'^rHOOCCCCOCt-N.COOO:'* 

coooo5COCMOcoTt«r;coT-icococN 

COCO  i-HCOCOC^  O>O  »C  OOOO  O 


<>•  t^  o  oo  o  <M 


i-i  O6'CO  »C  •*  CO  CO 


O  >O  -^  t^  00  <N  1C  CO  1C  00  <N  CO  CD  t^  O5  CO  rH  r-t       O       iH       C4 

"-HiOOOXC-lOOiiC       CDiC(NCO<Ni-(O 

•*     co  r~  r~  o>o  0}  <N     I-HI-KM     i-i     i-i 

1-1  .-1  OJ  W  »-i 


O  O5  CO  N-  CO  GO  CN  O  rf  O5  <N  O  i-l  b-  ^  O5  C^  1-1  O5  (N  00  i-ICO     • 
IO  O5  CO  CO  1-1  O  CO  •*  O  00  CM  t^  O  »O  O  00  CO  >O  rH  (M  CO  "5  (>•     • 

1O  Tj<  O5  »C  CO  O  t^  t^  O5  1^  CO  CO  O  CO  CO  rH  CO  CO       CDCOt^C<I 
(MOOt^t^iMOOCOOOcOOCOrtiiOcoOTHO5  rHOJCN 


IrH        COOOIM        rH        rH 


rHCO(MOOOOO>0 
I-H  t^  rH  O5       »OIOCOO5COCO 

rH  CO  CO  rH  00  CO  t>-  rHCSI         CO  I-H 


IO  00 
IO 
1>  1C 


i ; ;  IP : 

'  O     .  —         t-<   Z.  -^  V 


&8E 
111 

\5&& 


441 


o. 


<N  CO  iH  00  O  00  t- 

O  •*  r-t  00  1C  rH  <N 

CO        rHCCCO 


(M  •*  O  IV  O  •*  CO 

(N  •*  I>  CO  CO  »C  »0 

t^  GO  I-H  CO  t~  CO  >C 
1C       (Nt^iC 


C500CDOI 

CO^^H^-|( 
I>0r-H05< 


.-i  O5  oo  ec  i>  •*  ^H 


O  CO  >C  •*  .-1  i-H  00 
^  CO  >C  ^  *C  O  ^C 


ritfsSl 
i  sfiJ j!5 


442 


O 

T— I 

2 
I 

T— I 

O 

iH 

I 
.1 


GO 


O      ^     H 

£  I"! 

c,   a« 


W 
M 
W 


M*J 


1>  00  GO 

»o  ooo 


O       O       l 
i—  ICOOOCM 


^O^ 


t—OOOO 


<N  CO  00  CO  rt<  •* 
.-1  CO  i-l  <N  1-H  .H 
»O  OS  CO  iH  iH 


t^       »O       CO 

OOCOO5OO>< 


00       I-H 
••*       O> 

O        rH 


1 

C 

.! 

.§ 

s 

u 

c 

a 

^ 

i 

* 
| 

! 

•j 

I 
i 

if  ^ 

]    0-2    -Ex 

'•g  g     'S  a 

T1  *^ 

on       o  <n 

1 

X 

« 

1 

1 

1 

1 

+i 

i 

CC 

^J 

i 

I  111 


A 
Un 


1 1 


1  *  -a 

P  ^  P 


O" 


443 


* 


-a 


•I  H 


I 


6 
ft  §•&• 


a  I 


U3       00 

ooco 

OM  CO 
»Ot^r-l 

coo 


-Tj<     • 
-IN     • 


'-'- 
QOQ 

OOO 


O       O 
00       00 


-IN  t^ 
-COO 
-iO  O 


OO--I 
C<1O<N 


O5        5O        CD       IO  i-H  O5  i-l  00  CD 
WO5O5COOOSO5(MOGOt^OO 

(NCD^*—  <rHC^»OOC^OC<IO 


3S3  SSooSSS  i-j_o 

CO       CO       CO       i-l       >O       "3 


aes 
price  . 


J       I 
§        » 

o     .S 


fi 

2     ^  M  «      g     'w 

.1  ill  i  i 


ra 


z-  & 


!! 


is 


O" 


444 


4 

1 

§3$ 

coooco 

0 

1 

cc>ccooiNcocaoc5ooo 

tDOOOClOO       OrHOT-iO 

0 

co 

| 

g 

1 

<r> 

"1 

S 

* 

0 

;3 

•pq 

i 

!>i2oO 

ogoo 

§ 
1 

091177 

«  f^  OO.O  «"lO  IM  S  05  00  l>  S 
t^OCOCXDCDOOOC^i—  fi-Hi-H 

a 

CO 

(M 

s 

to 

o 

••rH 

>-< 

1 

I 

i 

8 

lO                  ^ 

o 
M 

* 

afe, 

i 

.^ 

1 
g 

coog 
oo 

§ 

cr. 

§ 

0 

g 

C^iOl^-OCO^fiCO*"  *O*^O 
OOOt^OOO       ONOIMO 

oc 

0 

^H 

t> 

§ 
I--. 

2 

5 

•H 

O 

d:£ 
00^1 

S 

1 
S 

s 

0 

•Oi       i-l       t^ 

05 

M 

* 

lT^          EH        <3 

£5        £      =0 

H>SI| 

• 

M        J§      § 

S-5& 

W         Kj 
MM. 

H  d-§ 

fc^i 

0  -s# 

3HBDULE  1 

's  CONDENSI 
Ding  Cost  of  P 

\ 

•; 

m  II 

O     0T 

W  S 
c§ 

: 

1 



1 

S 

> 

; 

;      | 

• 

8 

1  jjjy 

• 

• 

• 

• 

SQ 

«:s  • 

1 

p, 

:"§  :g  :  c  :  p,  : 

« 

2 

4'&i 

III 

O   >-• 

W 

1     - 

1 

lilt 

e 

'a 

! 

Unit  net  pro 

445 


-00     -CO      -i-l      -10        T»<      • 
-i-i      ••*      -CO      '01        (N      • 

§  :2  :^'  :     : 


n  oo 
6-1  • 
co  LO 


CO  CO  (N 
(M  OCO 

OCOr-l 


CT.OO 
1^ 

trr  c;  co 
r^  us 


glNCOCOCOOIOCOOCOOOi 
CO  t>  00  IO  Th  r^l  OJ-T-I  OC  01  CD 

CCCC'-iO'*'-<l>OOi'-IOOi-H 
COr-nOi-IOlTf  OlMOiMO 
rt<O<NOOO  O  O  O 


O1 


.8 1  -: 


."  S-"3  «o 
<£Q 


8    .S 

M  a 

•-3    .? 


S 


«    **?. 


c    •; 

a  :* 


ill    1    '3    "S 

>.§°     H     P     fc 


446 


**1 


O 


1 

la 


O'-HCO 


-<*iOOO(N'-(>CO 


Tf       O  GO  ^  Oi  ^O  t^  CC  CXD  Oi  t^- 

b»i-HTt<OOTj<rHOiOOOC^O 

O          »-"  1         C^          C^          C<l          rH 

O4  O  O  O  O  O       O       O       O 


Kg 


ce 


.S-C 

1  US, 

g.     °;2i 

£       £%" 

1    IS' 


§ 


447 


» 


f 


CC 


^  ^ 

iOO3i-Hi—  't^- 
TfiO»OOO 


OOtOO 
O      O 


!8§588888 


!f~OOlOr-« 

>  rt<  OOOOIN  • 
)  O  CO  O  I-H  O  W  < 


•a  s, 


ta     ^j 

1.1 


448 


SCHEDULE  3  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  8  —  (Continued) 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  —  HACKENSACK 
Statement  of  Fluid  Milk  Sales,  Showing  Cost  of  Products,  Exdenses  and  Net  Profit,  Fiscal  Year  1915-19J6 

Net  profit  on 
other  than 
milk  sales 

t^   • 

*  Profit  per  cent. 

Cost  and 
expenses  on 
per  cent  basis 

S    S  JS     '  j^  :^'  j 

* 

!? 

i          ;     ;     ; 

1! 

o 
o 

IN" 

lil 

s 

0 

CO 

1 

»—  iiOC5OTi*(NTt'O'^tOf"'O 

oooooot^-ooooo 

1 

i 

.085910 

2 

0 
CO 

1 

I 

1 

W       CS1       5                  «       CO 

w 

Buttermilk 

o» 

s 

S|£ 

O  Ci  GO 
h-  iO 
<N  O 

i  ' 

i 

059175 

1 

054378 

o 
e» 

.004797 

i 

> 
> 

i 

i 
) 

1 
1 

j 

* 
a 

•  j 

1 

I 

§ 

'.        '.              o 

:     :•:•:&:• 

.     •     .     •     .  M     .  O> 

S'8'     :      ^        M              *         '1    'I  "1    '&        ' 

"P:   2  •  |    *  :     :?  ||P  =|      ^ 

•sg§    §    8   4  :     :°  :^  :?  :-^       8 

iff  |  '  i  §.«-  ^l^lli^I^  i 

£'S    0)         "«        '2           j    .j   M  .,  -2    .j   fe   .5   5n    .j'3    .3        ^~* 

^&o..^  p-  g-a|>a  ^Iwal-a 

Unit  cost  .  . 

449 


^ 

10 

COCD-^ 

o!2 

o 

0 

i 

1 

Tf<.-l<N<NCC<NiOCO<NOOCOO 

ooo-^^oo-^cioot-tooo 

OOOtOOCOO       O  iH  O  I-H  O 

?4 

1 

053775 

S 
t^ 

t» 

O 

I 

PQ 

s 

8 

g       ^       CO 

$ 

05 

S 

1-^ 
O5 
i—  I 

^ 

Certified 

i 
§ 

tOOCO 

cooco 

t^iO  to 

Tj*  i-H 

O5 

ft 

W 

1 

a> 

(f.- 

i 

05 

-" 

tOTf<.-HiOTj<CO(X>iOCOt^CiO5 
OOOOtOCOCOi-<iOO<NC-ll>.:O 

N     '*-«     '<N 

•» 

s 

s 

t£ 

M 

T7 

2 

Cl 

?i 

3 

.017659 

•k, 

It 

K  ^ 

oo    ^  ^ 

Pasteurized  "  A  " 

N 

to  co  ^ 

CO  CO  CO 

t^  OCD 

o 

Cl 

I 

1 

(Nt^»OOt^(N(MOOCOOOG5O 
COt^-GOOOi-KXXNClCOCT)'—  i  O 

00       <N       to 

•» 

s 

t^ 

ro 

-*• 

1 

rj 

w 

s 

S 

i 

8 

.012339 

^  J  2 

: 

00 

r^ 

$£8 

g 

I 

ii^£38S£o;832 

tfi 

$ 

M 

fj 

i 

<c 
r^ 

F  EXHIBIT 

ANY  —  180TH 

ducts,  Expense 

PQ 

«o 

te 

Tt< 

" 

i-T        00         •<*         i-H         t^-         t>- 

to       tO       CO 
CO                  »~i 

! 

i 

:•? 
~ 

-^ 

3 

1 

«  ^  5" 

:  :  :  :     :        :     :  : 

d  9  § 

p  ^  ^ 

|  if 

|l 

02    ^ 

• 

"S5  3 

s5 

«  j 

v 

1 

i 

:     :  :     :        :g  : 

55 

S 

03 

3 

o1 

^ 
•^3 
a 

mount  of  sales  
nit  selling  price  
eductions  

et  amount  of  sales  .  . 

nit  net  selling  price  . 

.    .    .    •        •       <3S       Q2 

•:.'!«    «    a   .2 

1  :     :  i    ®  '  •?    -a 

I^:  JI^JljS^ 

siiiiiiiiifej 

Total  cost  

Unit  cost  

Net  profit  

Unit  net  profit  

S 

3 

O" 

<;&Q 

% 

p 

a  '3  _g-a  o'S'^'S'd'S'S'S 
PSPrtP^P^PO^ 

15 


450 


Net  profit  on 
other  than 
milk  sales 

COO) 
(N  IO 

§ 

0 
Ci 

g 

Ttt       '  IO       '  *C       *  rH       «  Ttt       •  IQ 

0     -S     -«3     -CO     .«     -<N     • 

^ 
•^ 

CO 

»o 

I 

"c  °l 

00     -O>     -<N     •           -I-H     -rn     • 
IO      •           -Cl      • 

§ 

SP 

LO 

T—  1 

C5 

In  o>  O 

;  :  '. 

1 

K~t 

*h 

gl 
0  ;<?» 
^  Si 

Tj 

t^. 

CO 

«* 

s 

CM  00  lO 

>O  00  O 

Tf<  OCO 

5 

091114 

C5C<JOOT-i(MT-lI-(Tt<O^O' 

ooci>-<r;i>T}-oa)»cSic:'* 

t>-C^OOi'~*OCOOCO»-HO^~* 
COiO-<tiCO<Nt^.O>OO:OO 
OOCOOiCOCDCt^OODO 

8 

085140 

§ 

1 

"* 

rif 
i  g^ 

1 

o~ 

0      <N 

i 

fe 

oc 
M 

CO       O       CO       N        O       O 
0       00       0                  -       - 

ii 

0 

CO 
V? 

i 

i  is 
l|i 

0     1     a. 
J     « 

Briarcliff 
buttermilk 

CO 

CO 
CO 

8£2 

5i 

£2 

co 
•* 

I 

o 

0) 

O»O'^1*'-ICOOOO'-IO'-! 
iCOt~cOiO"5i-iO-«*iC^O 
«5       <N       1C       CO       IN       (N 

i-H  Tf  Tt<  TJH  t^  (N         O         "-H         >-l 

«^g  s  s   s  s  s 

o     o     o     o     o     o 

<0 
0 

-H 

V} 

.  044024 

^ 
t> 

CN 

CO 

§ 

-1^-iVXl.JLJJlJ.  _L1  <~» 

MILK  COMPANY 
it  of  Products,  E 

Briarcliff 
fluid 

o 

SSco5 

g|^ 

9 

gj 

§ 
r* 

^ 

.  157264 

OOi-IC<|TfirtlCO»C>-O«CCOO500 
COOCOiOOOWCOO^'NiCCO 

OilM<N(NCq(MCOOCO'-lCO'-l 
!>.  CO  CO  i-<  •*  <M       Oi-HO^Q 

t^l-Hr-IOINO         O         O         O 

M 

*# 

o 

3 

(M 
&« 

t~ 

o 

0 

s 

(X) 
1C 

•^ 
«^ 

.041783 

*  Net  profit  per 

<JCj  1  \JJ} 

DENSED 

owing  Co, 

BORDEN'S  CON 
luid  Milk  Sales,  Sh 

m 
-*> 

$3 

1 

j 

|I| 

Quantity,  quarts.  . 

Amount  of  sales. 
Unit  selling  price 
Deductions  

Net  amount  of  si 

Unit  net  selling  j 

•g        i  :l  :*  ••  : 
1        5  |S  l^if 

1     1  ^IT^I 
slil^lllllil 

gfl'g'ao-s^cl's^fl 

y&^Prt&^P^POP 

1 
H 

! 

.£ 

^S 

-w 

s 

S3 

1 

3 
& 

451 


00  « 

O  * 

H  N 

s  i 

W  t 

M  § 

^L]  cu 


5   §3 

S  if 
«  el 


»    <3 
gCQ 

II 


1O  i-l  CO  (N  O  O  rf<  i-H  CC  i-< 
Oi-KNiMi-iO^OT^O 
-rt*  O  OO  O  O  O  O 


g 


TtnO( 


OCCiO 


rl. 


§  |i| 
fill 


•  .  ®  . 

i  :S": 


««  o  3 

•S82 


111 


II 


|. 

8-a 


«  -a  ;S^55*5^1!  Sill 
^  »   i'afil'aliiill 

UDfc&#£-<DOD-«t> 


452 


ei 


OD 


o 
N 


fcq 


EXHIBIT  N 
COMPA 
roducts, 


H 
MILK 
H  of  P 


^  1! 

H     5  ,3 

gs^. 

W      GQ     S 
W    ">z    « 

W    CQ 

§3 


W 

& 


g 


i-H         M         i-l 

CO        CO        CO 


COCOr}<fOOC<lCOO5iO'*t> 


3 


OOO'-H'O 
r-tt^.-iCO 


r-i^C^T-HOl^-i—li^t 

(NCOOO^<M(N       O 
iO  i—  <  T-H  O  ^  O       O 


453 


1 

of 


co    5j  < 

£  tl 

t*I 

S   |  8. 

3  3^ 
w  g| 
§s? 


02    "s 


§     eo" 

O     r-2^ 


uri 
A" 


?   B 


i-^' 
<Oi-i'O'<t<*#< 
(N  (M  O 


i 


O       O 
O       O 


454 


ft 

........           .     . 

Si 

^o 

s 

~   "    '~ 

s 

o 

m 

: 

-  —  ^ 

CO 

O5 

JLj 

o     >S     co    -n    -m    -co    • 

00 

rH 
O5 
rH 

op 

tO        O        t^      •            -rH      .»H      • 
»O         rH         (N       • 

i 

£ 

1 

m 

1  1  1 

vy  uin  wiuGU/j 

-  PATERSON 
and  Net  Profit,  F? 

i 

05 

rH 

00 

00 
>0 

t> 

cc 

0 

j*       CO       O                  rH       rH 

s»  ^  w 

B" 

.085734 

T 
5 
2 

*c 

1 

-' 

1      co 

D             £X 

,M 

I 

i-iir 

00? 

t^ic 

o 

04 

1 

1 
o 

Or-HOrHr-KNlNOOOOSO 

^  O  t^-  O  O5  O       O       O       O 

§ 

057463 

S 

g 

i 

l!i 

"3 

PQ 

rH                     rH 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSE 
les,  Showing  Cost  of 

2        ^ 

I 

• 

1 

;  ;  ;  ;|  ;  ; 

• 

:«  :S  • 

1 

Jri 

'C 

N    ' 

CO 

•J 

to 

M 

3         .  S    .  g    ..S    .  g«    . 

. 

« 

Quantity,  quarts 

Amount  of  sal* 

TTnif.  Bpllinff  nr 

Deduction  .  .  . 

Net  amount  o' 

Unit  net  sellin 

H 

Unit  cost  .  . 

1 

1 

Unit  net  pro 

455 


M    "7 

PQ    9 


8  § 


If 

«S 

f- 

"§ 

g 


/  i~l  >O  00  l~-  «O  O5  t^  <-H  •      •      •      • 

Oi  O  CO  i-i  t^  CO  Tti  b-  .... 

tOrt<OO1*<M'-it>-  •     •     •     • 

>  t>  "5  OO  TJ<  rH  O  -"f  O:  .... 

5  l>  CO  CO  <N  i-H  i-H  lO  IM  •     •     •     • 


'-lTt<OOC«3T^i-iCodi'-iC) 


K  C«  M  «D  i^  A  O  O 

OOI>OOlNt^b-»-(CO( 


»C  rfi  (N  O  CD  CO  O 
T-i(NOIM       QO-^ 

"»  - 


10  10  oo  oo  oo  »c  »o  ess  03  Tf<  o     in 

COCNt^Tt*       O-^COfHOCO       ^t1 
«»       CO  05i-l  10 


t-CXDcNiOCOOSt-COtoCOcNt^ 


Nt^OO^CDClcOt^O'M^CN'-l 
,-H  O  i-i  0  10  05  O  OS  <N  <M  b-  to 
CO^OOrtl  rjl  r-l  CO  i-l  lO  rH 


ft  •  a 


•i^lllillsllli  ^ 
eo§f?|JSll|lll 


450 


1 

O  OS  <M  •*  CO 

CO  Tj<  t^»O  T}< 

<N    '    '  eo'  N.' 

3 

00 

^ 

CS 

0 

n 

"O  C75  CO  COCO 

»-ICX|OS(N  CO 
"*  CO  CO  CO  ^ 

§ 

'o 

CO(N<N03l^ 

o" 

H 

g^^SS 

r 

I 

^oc^ooco 

s 

Ot^CCTjtcO 

s 

% 

^    ^2 

I 

O 

a 

§ 

§ 

SS82S 

to 

r< 

'o 

SoSioS 

1 

iO       (N  ^  O^l 

O 

PH 

^                  CO 

1 

to 

a 

o 

C3 

s~. 

•     .     .     . 

0 

:  :  :  : 

•^ 
co 

-S5 

* 

tenance  

:'HS'  :  •' 

u  g  a    .    • 

S£g|l 

-a—  §•« 

|l! 

M  W)S  m  n 

J3J5X!^!X3 

§§§§§ 

S22SS 
pqpqpqpqpp 

457 


458 


EXHIBIT 


<g-» 


I! 

S^ 

g^: 


1  S 

SI 

2  8, 

J* 


s 


&fe. 

Sf 


Pasteurized 
west 


Sl>rH 
COIN 

Si* 


K      --I      •( 

§5     '  :• 


IN       i-c       CO 


>- 

>-iOO-*t|TtiOO<Ni-iO5'-i 
OKMr-HCClNtHOfNOOOO 
OOOOOO  O>-iO  O 


o|§ 


1  *  : 

•s  *  J 

+>  *"^  O 

fl  'c;  3 

§ 


^    Pi    I    1 

-P^  O   -*^_i  .  -*^ 

a     S'S 
«3P( 


Qu 


«      a     ^^  M^-is^  ai^  S-^'S^ 

*•   ^    o'sT"        "  r"'H    ' 


-°  S 


!  ! 

*§    s 

»    fl 


459 


OS 


a  tJ2 

at 


o 

iH 


g     *    § 

111 


i-l         1C         i-H 


g       CO 


ScocO'-H 
iOCOt^ 


- 

.-HCOo<NClOoo 
iOi-HOOO       OCOO<NO 


CO 


SCOt^t--C 

(N          1-1 


rH         »C         r-l 


I  Ju  i 

^  sl§  I 
1  hi  I 

O1    •«& 


5    -S    -g 
111 


f  1   J6 

H     &     55 


460 


Value  of 
chinery  and 
quipment 


mount  of 
preciation 


11 


Value  of 
buildings  an 
structure 


CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  CO  -IWH 


rf!C^C<|Tt<OOCOOO> 

!><N  CO  Tj.  U5  rH  CO 


(MOCOOOOO 


•00"*< 

'.to    '.    lie- 

•  •*    •     o< 

•  co    •     »«• 


133  :8 

.COCO      -CO 


ggg 

cccoro" 


g 


ing  plan 
izing  plan 


DeKalb  avenue  pasteuri 
Long  Island  City  pasteu. 


461 


'S 


^s 

•1 

O 


H 

3 

— 

W 


t^COCO'-KN 

O  00  t^O<-H 

s 

<oi5 

CO 

"8.1 

»CCD  COCO  O 
i-*COCO       O 

ra 

oco 

t^OJ 

s 

"a.  2 

•» 

8 

I| 

°'S  o 

^^^ 

ff 

If 

1- 

cDNlnSH^     • 

s 

qjo 

0 

«*-  *  a 
0  >>£ 

g>00££     ; 

1C 

o 

CON 

g 

111 
*|l 

rH  (N  -^         t-       • 

*V        co"   : 

0 

* 

fl 

SSS: 

3 

cot- 

1 

11 

SSSS  : 

i 

1 

ii 

3 

i 

ggg 

*$ 

Value 
buildings  and 
structures 

IIS 
jj* 

•3C 

§ 

N»n 

COO 
CO  l> 

F 

8 
I 

';    | 

1 

1          '• 

!5 

!       ! 

• 

H 

i; 

acuse  
ca  
ckensack  
li  street  
th  street  
erson  

1 

h  street  
glewood  

II 

462 


a, 
§• 


1 1 
III 

n 


•ga 


eo  t^>o  oo  O  ?0 

CO  C^l  CO  t>>  OJ  tH 
rt<  C^      -r-iC^     . 


38  SV 


t^i-Ht« 

SS5". 


~ttOW-nOO 
Oi  CO  CO  •*  00  CO 

t^eo    -t^oo    • 

8.-JJO- 


:«1  :     : 


<S  3  i 

&<!l 


111 


463 


4G4 


1     1 

|al 
P| 

00  05  CO 

SS5S 

0000     • 

:  :  : 

:  :  :  i 

1  -a 

•    -    ' 

•s    « 

1C  CO  <N 

is8 

8  CO  CO 
TfGC 
i—  (  CO 

oo  ic"5- 

Pasteurize 
fluid, 
quart  bott 

co" 

O5CO 

O5 
<N 

O5CO 

3s 

O 

rH 

O5 
i—  I 
1 

OQ 

« 

§t^lQ 
00     • 

o  >o  oo 

CO  CO 

If 

ioi>cc 

••*  GOO 

O1I>CO 

1? 

T-H 

2 

S 

&§ 

03   Q< 
«| 

S 

<N 

H 

N 

&* 

h     r^> 

5  S 

£  -3 

5  si. 

si 

<S« 

00  rH 

p" 

5. 

s5 

CT    0  J 

"     §1 

si 

*S£ 

-,    o  s 
r^    H   <w 

HH    2  Es 

QQ     g    . 

3| 

s| 

IP 

<N 

t^-  l-H 

00^ 

S    ^ 
W6l 

11 

cr 

(N 

H.«-tfc 

K  JS 

11 

(X3    ^ 

«| 

6 

S-- 

o 

.  .  . 

| 

1 

§ 

K 

2 

(Fluid  used,  pounds  
Fluid  waste,  pounds  
Per  cent  of  waste  

j^'  : 
•§§» 

c> 

f  Fluid  used,  pounds  
Papakating  \  Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
i  Per  cent  of  waste  

[  Fluid  used,  pounds  
Stamfordville  {  Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
[  Per  cent  of  waste  

ft^? 

C 
D 

« 

(  Fluid  used,  pounds  
Barton  \  Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
[  Per  cent  of  waste  

{Fluid  used,  pounds  
Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
Per  cent  of  waste  

(Fluid  used,  pounds  
Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
Per  cent  of  waste  . 

{Fluid  used,  pounds  
Fluid  waste,  pounds  .... 
Per  cent  of  waste  

465 


466 


t^io" 


££' 

00 


31 


II- 


llsi  ia$ 


pou 
,  p 


jiJ  iii  dj  -iiJ  iij  ii^ 


to       3  O  ro       30 

bag     o  ag     o  a 
a.?     R  »P     ft- 


ift  ift  tfc  ift  ^"is  tft  ils  I'- 


ll;  11 ;  HI  |||  w*  -s-s 

^pEtPn      EdfcPLi      Pti^CH      fe^H- 


j^j  °  :|:|  ° 

sss  slfS  ssl 


uid 
uid 


ooooo 
(Nrooo 


467 


•ffiJ  •S'Sci 

c  s-S  ta  3-2 

iy  IM 

111  III 

=»^g  s  ^g 

T3^  O  ^^  w 

ES^  SSf2 


468 

EXHIBIT  No.  14 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 
Statement  oj  Income  and  Profit  and  Loss,  as  of  July  1, 1915,  to  July  1, 1916 

Gross  sales $46,512,969  86 

Deductions  from  sales 921 , 956  27 


Net  sales $45,591,013  59 

Cost  of  goods  sold: 

Production  cost  of  goods  sold $40 , 789 , 968  85 

Loss  on  defective  goods 58 , 148  70 

Total 40,848,117  55 

Gross  profit $4,742,896  04 

Selling  and  administration  expense 1,678,450  13 


Net  profit $3,064,445  91 

Other  income: 

Interest $193,232  32 

Refunds 105,534  68 

Discounts  received 127, 104  45 

Dividends  of  affiliated  companies 36,497  90 

Royalties 14, 100  75 

Rentals 6, 511  57 

Profit  on  investments 9,748  45 

Property  equipment  transactions 76 , 735  96 

Total 569,46608 


Gross  income $3,633,911  99 

Deductions  from  other  income: 

Discounts  allowed $329,810  46 

Taxes 208, 169  22 

Insurance 64 , 880  39 

Interest 18,992  66 

Farm  operations 9 , 626  83 

Total.  .  631,479  56 


Net  income $3,002,432  43 

Profit  and  loss  surplus  at  beginning 3 , 979 , 800  27 

Adjustment  of  inventory $29 , 696  73 

Adjustment  of  inter-company  accounts 3,889  71 

Miscellaneous 1 , 766  00 


Total  profit  and  loss  credits 35,352  44 

Profit  and  loss  gross  surplus $7,017,585  14 

Profit  and  loss  charges: 

Loss  on  disposal  of  property,  equipment,  etc $32,396  11 

Adjustment  of  book  values 279,087  00 

Adjustment  of  interest  on  inter-company's  accounts 4,001  22 

Dividends,  preferrred  stock 450, 000  00 

Dividends,   common  stock 1 , 704, 328  00 

Dividends,  profit-sharing r .  .  .  .  115,000  00 

Subscribers'  agreements 32, 000  00 

Transferred  to  reserves 1 , 129 , 339  85 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Company  Employees'  Benefit 

Association 5,000  00 

Miscellaneous. .  .  3,016  23 


Total  profit  and  loss  charges 3,754,368  41 

Profit  and  loss  surplus  at  end  of  period $3,263,216  75 


469 

EXHIBIT  No.  15 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 
Balance  Sheet  as  of  July  1,  1916 

ASSETS 

Property  and  plant $1,714,717  83 

Buildings 7,819,535  15 

Machinery,  tools  and  equipment 5,946,558  28 

Horses,  harness  and  vehicles 1 ,980, 700  19 

Furniture  and  fixtures 168,498  84 

Construction  (in  process) 295 , 136  52 

Total $17,925,146  81 

Less  reserve  for  depreciation: 

Buildings $1,696,928  55 

Machinery,  tools  and  equipment 1,888,507  64 

Harness,  horses  and  vehicles 793 , 802  04 

Furniture  and  fixtures.. .  63,253  31 


Total.  .  4,442,491  54 


Net  property  and  plant $13,482,655  27 

Trade  marks,  patents,  goodwill 9,746,279  53 

Investments  in  affiliated  companies 1 , 700 , 526  16 

Special  fund  investments: 

Route  salesmen's  deposits $325,960  41 

Insurance 650,269  59 

New    York    State    Workmen's    Compensation    Security 

Department 23 , 048  50 

Total 999,278  50 

Securities  owned — short  term  notes 3 , 765  00 

Mortgages  owned 3 , 000  00 

Working  and  trading  assets: 

Finished  goods $927, 622  26 

Goods  in  process 334 , 561  36 

Raw  material  and  supplies 2,472,837  71 

Insurance  prepaid 4 , 1 19  43 

Taxes  paid 41,600  10 

Royalties  paid 1 , 205  88 

Contracts  and  leases  paid  in  advance 4 , 138  04 

Total 3,786,084  78 

Current  assets: 

Cash  in  banks $4,775,733  19 

Petty  cash  funds 294,038  60 

Payroll  funds  advanced 57, 629  79 

Cash  in  transit 120,399  97 


Total $5,247,801  55 

Accounts  receivable: 

Customers $1,250,230  85 

Claims 153,361  93 

Employees 26,046  59 

Agents 14,642  76 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Company  Em- 
ployees' Investment  Association 15,932  91 

Rents 259  79 

Accrued  interest 15,588  36 


Total 1,476,063  19 

Certified  checks  on  deposit  as  security 2 , 157  62 

Notes  receivable 30,073  96 

Loans  to  route  salesmen 12  00 

Due  from  affiliated  companies: 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Sales  Co $1,803,952  55 

Borden's  Milk  Co.,  Limited 448,789  35 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Co.,  Limited..  8,429  86 

Borden's  Premium  Co.,  Inc 78,994  94 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Co.  of  Utah.  .  74,260  26 

National  Condensed  Milk  Co 17, 115  77 


Total  .........................................         2,431,54273 

Dividends  receivable  from  affiliated  companies  .............  36,497  90 


Total  current  assets  .................................................         9  ,  224  ,  148  95 

erred  suspended  assets: 
Funds  enclosed  in  liquidation  ........................  $23,  582  96 

Accounts  awaiting  distribution  ...................  ____  166,814  96 


Total..  190,39792 


Total  assets $39,136,136  11 


4TO 

EXHIBIT  ~No.  15  —  (Concluded) 
BALANCE  SHEET  AS  OF  JULY  1,  1916 — (Concluded) 

LIABILITIES 
Capital  stock: 

Preferred $7,500,000  00 

Common 21,310,200  00 


Total $28,810,200  00 

Route  salesmen's  department 216,222  74 

Current  liabilities: 
Accounts  payable: 

Invoices $2,716,479  51 

Claims 2,121  53 

Contracts  and  leases 3,084  73 

Unclaimed  checks 1 ,634  91 

Income  tax  withheld 210  80 

Due  to  affiliated  companies 22,354  66 

Borden's  Condensed  Milk  Company 
Employees'  Investment  Associa- 
tion   4,935  10 

Dividends  payable 60  00 

Profit  sharing  distribution 110,640  29 

Others 271,058  07 


Total $3, 132,579 

Accrued  accounts: 

Route  salesmen's  commissions $182,041  27 

Allowances 27,270  84 

Interest  on  route  salesmen's  depart- 
ment   26,019  34 

Taxes 55,000  00 

Royalties 3,333  34 

Insurance 6,000  00 

Others 1,656  35 


Total 301,321  14 


Total  current  liabilities 3,433,900  74 

Deferred  and  suspended  liabilities: 

Subscribers'  agreements $147,500  00 

State  Compensation  Commission 1 ,742  52 

Real  estate  contracts 705  73 

Accounts  awaiting  distribution 1 ,452  58 


Total 151 , 400 

Reserves: 

From  Operations: 

Credit  guarantee $74, 756  55 

Accidents  (other  than  employees).. .  57,007  71 

Premium  labels 107,900  54 

Christmas  donations 7,938  00 

Total $247,602  80 

From  surplus: 

Contingency $1,000,000  00 

Pensions 32,871  99 

Sick    benefits    and    accidents,    em- 
ployees   64,776  23 

Insurance 830,792  28 

Route  department  extension 1,075,396  69 

Other 9,755  08 

Total..  3,013,59227 


Surplus 3,261, 195  07 

Profit  and  loss  surplus 3,263,216  73 

Total  liabilities .     $39,136,136  11 


471 

EXHIBIT  No.  16 
BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY  —  ROUTE  DEPARTMENT 

(FARM  PRODUCTS  DIVISION  —  EAST  AND  WEST) 
Condensed  Profit  and  Loss  Statement,  July  1,  1915,  to  June,  30,  1916 

Gross  sales $23,925,302  99 

Less  deductions 101 ,497  92 


Net  sales $23,823,805  07 

Cost  of  goods,  freight  and  selling  expenses .  .     $22 ,436 , 146  25 

General  selling  expenses 337, 188  60 

General  administrative  expenses 258,863  72 

23,032,198  57 


Net  profit $791,606  50 

SCHEDULE  B  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  16 

ROUTE  FACTORY  MANAGERS  —  EAST 
H.  A.  Cronk.  general  manager  of  factories. 
D.  E.  Burrows,  clerk. 
D.  J.  Purdy,  construction  work. 
Grant  Laidlaw,  in  charge,  of  construction  work. 

F.  E.  Goldsmith,  in  charge  of  equipment. 
H.  K.  Lewis. 

G.  G.  Thompson,  assistant  to  Mi.  Cronk. 
F.  H.  Wilcox 


A.  P.  Washburn 
Geo.  Lambrecht 

E.  Lopray 

F.  J.  Paddock 


District  superintendents,  most  of  time  in  country. 


ROUTE  SALES  MANAGERS  —  EAST 
P.  D.  Fox,  manager  of  sales. 
A.  A.  Brousse,  division  superintendent. 
W.  T.  Trwin,  in  charge  of  horses  and  feed. 
F.  D.  Cooper,  division  superintendent 
A.  R.  Gutierez,  division  superintendent. 
E.  Smethurst,  assistant  to  Mr.  Fox. 
W.  Warnecke,  division  superintendent  in  district. 
M.  L.  Voight,  division  superintendent  in  district. 

IN  CHARGE  OF  RAILROAD  TERMINAL  PLATFORMS  —  PLATFORM  MEN 
Henry  Bischotf,  P.  Killeen, 

G.  McGuire,  T.  B.  Milne, 

W.  J.  Noonan,  J.  Salzloin. 

VETERINARIAN 
J.  F.  Smith,  city  man. 

ROUTE  FACTORIES  —  EAST  COUNTRY  VETERINARIAN 
C.  D.  Pearce,  Cassius  Way, 

F.  D.  Holford,  John  McCartney, 

G.  T.  Stone,  A.  H.  McClelland. 
W.  H.  Phyfe, 

F.  D.  Walmsley. 

ICE  CREAM 
P.  A.  Brock,  in  charge  of  ice  cream. 


472 

SCHEDULE  C  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  16 

MATERIALS  USED  IN  VARIOUS  MANUFACTURED  ICE  CREAMS  AND' ICES  FOR 

MONTHS  OF  JUNE  AND  JULY,  1916 

American  Cream  Quantity 

June  July 

Homo,  quarts 43 , 940  58 , 520 

Sugar,  pounds 19,298  25,566 

Gelatine,  ounces 11 , 626  11 , 868 

Lemon  whip,  ounces 6.5  12 . 5 

Bananas 

Vanilla,  ounces 5 , 192  7 , 412 

Strawberry,  pints 1 ,904  4,608 

Chocolate,  pounds 976  1 , 170 

Pineapple,  pints 16  56 

Peaches,  pints 36  62 

Green  color,  ounces 4.5  4.5 

Walnuts,  pounds 21  34 

Maple  syrup,  pints 6  

Sugar,  pounds 385  580 

Red  color,  ounces 28 . 5  58 

Almond  mix,  pints 12  13 

Tutti  frutti  mix,  pints 

Burnt  sugar  flavor,  pints 18  57 

Maple  sugar,  pounds 1 .  i  

Strawberry  syrup,  pints 210  

Coffee,  pounds 17  17 

French  Cream 

June  July 

Extra  heavy,  quarts 30  30 

Grade  "A"  milk,  quarts 58  60 

Sugar,  pounds 48  52 

Vanilla  beans,  ounces 10 

Strawberry,  pints 8  6 

Chocolate,  pounds 4 

Egg  yolks,  doz 41|  50 

Red  color,  ounces 1 


Ices 

July  June 

Sugar,  pounds 1 ,282  1 ,944 

Water,  quarts 1,1861  1,719* 

Gelatine  ounces 68  114 

Raspberry,  pints 10 

Red  color,  ounces 3| 

Pineapple,  pints 

Oranges,  each 

Orange  whip,  ounces 25 .  £  25 

Lemons,  each 

Lemon  whip,  ounces 

Citric  sol,  ounces 69 

Grape  juice,  pints 1  


Puddings 

June  July 

Extra  heavy  cream,  quarts 4  % 

Sugar,  pounds \            

Egg  yolks,  each 49  25 

Almond  Macs,  pounds 

Maraschino,  pints i             


473 

SCHEDULE  D  OF  EXHIBIT  2sTo.  16 

BORDEN'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 

Branch  Managers  and  Superintendents  of  All  Branches,  Factories  and 

Pasteurizing  Plants 
EASTERN  BRANCHES  NAME  OF  MANAGER 

34th  street F.  L.  Lewis 

117th  street C.  J.  Carstens 

St.  Place E.  F.  Newton 

DeKalb  avenue B.  Skidmore 

Jersey  City E.  F.  Shanahan 

Newark H.  J.  Badger 

180th  street T.  J.  Boyd 

Liberty  avenue W.  Miller 

Fort  Hamilton  avenue E.  Bottenus 

84th  street S.  V.  Henry 

New  Rochelle G.  Bartels 

Mt.  Vernon A.  Spring 

Passaic C.  H.  Miller 

Yonkers Eli  DePugh 

29th  street F.  J.  Doerner 

Montclair H.  Bobbe 

Manhattan  street V.  Cutts 

Staten  Island F.  Zurmuhlen 

133rd  street F.  Gale 

Tarrytown H.  D.  Haring 

White  Plains W.  R.  Mclntyre 

Long  Island  City C.  A.  Worden 

Water  street C.  A.  Fleig 

Gravesend  avenue J.  J.  Hardcastle 

Downing  street C.  A.  Fleig 

North  Newark E.  Kunst 

Union  Hill J.  H.  Edwards 

Flushing W.  D.  Bradburn 

Metropolitan  avenue J.  J.  Weaver 

Far  Rockaway A.  A.  Spence 

Portchester I.  I.  Mosback 

Paterson F.  A.  Hartman 

Hackensack Buchanan 

Stamford W.  H.  DeMill 

South  Norwalk H.  Terry 

Asbury  Park L.  S.  Pickel 

Elizabeth E.  T.  Van  Sicklen 

Rockville  Center DeWitt  Newton 

Bridgeport , G.  E.  Bellows 

Albany R.  J.  Singler 

116th  street F.  Sniffin 

Plainfield L.  S.  Pickel 

Troy H.  A.  Wessell 

Jamaica W.  Austin 

Babylon DeWitt  Newton 

Roslyn G.  Fodell 

Ridgewood F.  A.  Hartman 

Utica J.  Moak 

Syracuse G.  Drewitz 

Schenectady J.  F.  Hembdt 

Rochester J.  F.  Gammon 

Buffalo A.  Hockstra 

Hartford A.  Scinknecht 

Stapleton,  S.  I J.  Daly 

Jefferson  Market .   R.  Kaht 

D.  K.  I.  C.  P...  .  P.  A.  Brock 


474 


PASTEURIZING  PLANTS  NAME    F  MANAGER 

DeKalb  avenue W.  P.  Merrill 

Jersey  City Moscript 

Long  Island  City W.  Young 

180th  street G.  F.  Popenseik 

310  117th  street F.  E.  Curtis 

Montreal I.  A.  Hungerford 

WESTERN  ROUTE  FACTORIES  NAME  OP  MANAGER 

Alden,  111 D.  F.  Curtis 

Bassets,  Wis H.  V.  Sheloske 

Gary  Station,  111 F.  M.  Risley 

Hebron,  111 O.  Horton 

Lake  Geneva,  Wis J.  J.  Reser 

Marengo,  111 .  . E.  C.  Robb 

Salem,  Wis Robert  Gronza 

West  McHenry,  111 John  E.  Pufahl 

Ridgefield,  111 J.  H.  Slater 

Sycamore,  111 H.  P.  Paaske 

West  Chicago,  111 Carl  E.  Cowles 

Woodstock,  111 George  L.  Tuttle 

Virgil,  111 C.  Hermance 

Wanconda,  111 H.  C.  Price 

Burlington,  111 R.  McBride 

Englewood,  Chicago,  111 R.  C.  Woodrich 

WESTERN  CITY  BRANCHES  NAME  OF  MANAGER 

Van  Buren  street F.  C.  Miller 

Monroe  street T.  C.  Dwyer 

Talman  avenue C.  E.  Brickson 

Irving  Park William  C.  Mann 

Ravenswood G.  Anderson 

47th  street C.  E.  Richards 

24th  street E.  P.  McGinnes 

Englewood F.  Frandsen 

103rd  street B.  L.  DuVal 

South  Chicago  avenue E.  N.  Sawyer 

Oak  Park J.  M.  Swanson 

BlNGHAMTON  DIVISION  NAME  OF  MANAGERS 

Barton G.  W.  Franklin 

Berkshire F.  H.  Martin 

Brisben Gray 

Cortland Fay  Mott 

Deposit G.  W.  Montgomery 

Dryden F.  W.  Wood 

Endicott G.  W.  Franklin 

Lakewood L.  E.  Fuller 

Montrose J.  H.  Armstrong 

Newark  Valley F.  A.  Lawrence 

Nichols G.  W.  Franklin 

Oxford Charles  I.  Stone 

Owego C.  D.  Whitney 

Richford James  H.  Hogan 

Thompson E.  E.  Ely 

Ulster W.  T.  Ryan 

Whitney  Point E.  T.  Fancher 

CANADA  NAME  OF  MANAGERS 

Maxville,  P.  Q H.  W.  Winter 

Ormstown,lP._Q F.  J.  Writer 


475 


CHATHAM  DIVISION  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

Ancram,  L.  M Ira  C.  Whitford 

Brewster C.  D.  Greenleaf 

Canaan F.  N.  Glass 

Old  Chatham John  L.  Gray 

Chatham John  L.  Gray 

Cherry  Valley B.  J.  Wightman 

Copake G.  H.  Andrews 

Craryville C.  W.  Smith 

Hopewell  Junction Curtis  Burnett 

Lime  Rock S.  H.  Frear 

Middleburgh F.  P.  Betz 

Millerton W.  N.  Bates 

Pine  Plains O.  Beckwith 

Schoharie S.  L.  Way 

Sharon  Springs R.  C.  Berry 

Stanfordville H.  S.  Broad 

Washington  Depot B.  H.  Hurlburt 

Wassaic H.  L.  Whitford 

Wingdale W.  I.  Vermilyea 

W.  Stockbridge F.  N.  Glass 

MlDDLETOWN  DIVISION  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

Branchville R.  W.  Dye 

Burnside R.  E.  Coloin 

Cochecton : . .  J.  E.  Dennis 

Florida Edgar  Fall 

Goshen A.  M.  White 

Honesdale W.  S.  Curtis 

Huntsville S.  H.  Mars 

Johnsons H.  S.  Smith 

New  Milford I.  M.  Roos 

Otisville E.  L.  Walker 

Papakating F.  H.  Clayton 

Pine  Bush R.  E.  Beckwith 

Pine  Island P.  S.  House 

Sugar  Loaf L.  S.  Stanton 

Wisner L.  S.  Stanton 

Walkill J.  A.  Jansen 

Washingtonville A.  H.  Oliver 

SIDNEY  DIVISION  NAMES  OP  MANAGERS 

Afton A.  A.  Williams 

Delhi W.  D.  Macklen 

Downsville L.  R.  Strong 

Edmeston G.  L.  Hatchkin 

Hamden W.  L.  Schwachleimer 

Harpersville G.  W.  Tilford 

Maywood S.  D.  Russell 

Mt.  Upton J.  K.  Mallory 

Gilbertsville J.  K  Mallory 

Otego B.  S.  Gray 

Papacton G.  A.  Brandage 

Schenevus Russell  Camden 

South  New  Berlin A.  J.  Biglow 

South  Worcester John  S.  Dykeman 

Tunnel R.  D.  Washburn 

West  Edmeston N.  S.  Holland 

Worcester George  Travers 

Youngs A.  A.  Card 


476 


DEER  RIVER  DIVISION  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

Altmar W.  J.  Fallows 

Camden C.  F.  Bartlet 

Carthage W.  C.  Webb 

Croghan H.  M.  Christian 

Delphi  Falls B.  F.  Larresson 

Denley C.  N.  Cheeny 

Lyon's  Falls Howard  Dye 

Port  Leyden Frederick  Studor 

Sterlingville W.  L.  Staring 

Turin Th.  DeWan 

UTICA  DIVISION  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

Bouckville J.  B.  Johnes 

Earlville R.  H.  Gilson 

Fort  Ann F.  R.  Anderson 

Fort  Plain Charles  Hansome 

Gansevoort H.  Green 

Gouverneur D.  L.  Stamford 

Granville R.  C.  Corey 

Keenes D.  L.  Stamford 

Morrisville J.  B.  Johnes 

Poultney D.  E.  Decker 

Richfield  Springs H.  M.  Curtis 

Rouse's  Point F.  M.  Nutt 

Solsville F.  J.  Hardge 

Waterville W.  P.  Risley 

Westmoreland W.  E.  Paddock 

West  Winfield G.  A.  Loose 

Whitehall H.  A.  Dick 

ALLEGANY  DIVISION  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

Alfred W.  W.  Chapman 

Almond H.  D.  Corey 

Attica W.  F.  Dye 

Bath Harry  Otto 

Belmont H.  E.  Ostrand 

Belvedere C.  H.  Dickens 

Black  Creek Frederick  Williams 

Bliss Edward  Way 

Cuba P.  D.  Wood 

Cuba  Summit W.  H.  Backer 

Elm  Valley C.  E.  Right 

Friendship F.  F.  Brayton 

Hinsdale George  A.  Pike 

Scio R.  E.  James 

CERTIFIED  FARMS  NAME  OF  FARM 

Great  Barrington,  Mass Bonnie  Brae 

Pine  Plains,  N.  Y Briarcliff 

Bridgenton,  L.  I Carwython 

Denmark,  N.  Y Cook  Blodgett 

Clifton,  N.  Y Hawthorne 

Willow  Point,  N.  Y Hazard  Lewis 

Waverhisville,  N.  Y Hungerkill 

Mattensberg,  N.  Y Hillcrest 

North  Stamford,  Conn Skymadon 

Poughquag Lime  Bridge 

South  Montrose,  Pa. Loudenhill 

Avon,  N.  Y Markham  Puffer 

Johnsonville,  N.  Y St.  Croix 


477 

BORDEN  CERTIFIED  FARMS  NAMES  OF  MANAGERS 

A.  Chatham Frank  Reid 

W.  Walkhill Levy  Keyes 

C.  Earlville H.  Snyder 

D.  Edmeston .  . .  R.  L.  Sawyer 

Goshen  Farm D.  F.  Jewett 


REPORT 


TO 


JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 


EXAMINATION  OF  ACCOUNTS,  SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON-DECKER 
COMPANY,  347"  WEST  57TH  STREET,  NEW  YORK  CITY,  JANU- 
ARY 1,  1915  —  DECEMBER  31,  1915 


[479] 


481 


EXAMINATION  OF  ACCOUNTS,  SHEFFIELD  FARMS 
SLAWSON-DECKER  COMPANY,  JANUARY  1,  1915  — 
DECEMBER  31,  1915 

December  2,  1916. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

Gentlemen. — Agreeable  to  your  request  I  have  made  an  ex- 
amination of  the  books  of  account  of  the  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson- 
Decker  Company  of  347  West  57th  Street,  New  York  City,  aa*l 
in  connection  with  same  I  am  attaching  hereto  report,  exhibits 
and  schedules  showing  an  analysis  of  expense  distribution  in  con- 
nection with  the  operation  of  their  business. 

Very  truly  yourg, 

HERBEET  B.  HAWKINS, 

Certified  Public  Accountant. 
1G 


482 


KEPOET 

The  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson-Decker  Company  is  a  corporation 
with  issued  and  outstanding  capital  common  stock  of  $1,000,000 
and  preferred  stock  of  $1,495,700.00  conducting  a  general  business 
in  the  purchase  and  distribution  of  milk  on  routes  and  also  through 
a  chain  of  stores.  In  addition  to  the  milk  business  conducted  in 
these  stores  this  company  also  sells  a  large  part  of  the  1,300,000 
pounds  of  butter  which  they  manufacture  and  in  addition  a  con- 
siderable amount  of  sundry  groceries. 

The  activities  of  the  company  in  connection  with  the  operation 
of  farms,  and  the  manufacture  of  by-products  to  a  greater  extent 
than  has  been  found  in  most  companies  heretofore  examined,  to- 
gether with  the  sale  of  groceries  in  their  stores,  as  aforesaid,  make 
a  definite  statement  of  the  cost  of  producing  and  distributing 
milk  impossible  without  a  complete  re-analysis  and  examination 
of  every  item  entering  into  their  records.  As  an  example  of  the 
incompleteness  of  the  records,  it  was  impossible  to  determine  the 
total  number  of  quarts  of  milk  purchased,  except  by  a  complete 
re-analysis  of  the  voucher  record,  and  even  upon  a  re-analysis  of 
same  it  was  found,  in  a  great  many  instances,  that  items  other  than 
milk,  such  as  freight,  ice,  feed  and  charges  for  pasteurizing  ex- 
penses, were  wrongfully  posted  therein.  It  can  be  said  that  the 
same  difficulty  was  encountered  in  connection  with  determining 
the  total  quarts  of  milk  sold,  the  same  being  undeterminable  except 
by  an  analysis  of  a  Sundry  Accounts  Receivable  Ledger,  to  which 
were  posted  sundry  sales  to  steamboat  companies  and  export  sales 
to  Panama,  etc. 

It  is  very  evident  from  the  foregoing  that  no  attempt  has  been 
made  in  any  direction  to  determine  costs  for  any  of  the  company's 
activities,  and  where  an  analysis  of  expenses  has  been  made,  it  in- 
variably has  been  made  incorrectly,  as  errors  in  the  books  herein- 
after referred  to  will  show. 

In  addition  to  setting  up  the  costs  as  contained  herein,  innumer- 
able vouchers  were  examined  and  notations  made  of  same,  and  in 
connection  with  these  I  would  call  your  attention  to  the  following: 


483 

Dec.  31,  1915  —  Invoice  No.  1828  —  Loton  Horton $810.00 

Invoice  No.  1765  —  R.  C.  Campbell 136 . 00 

Dec.  24,  1915  —  Invoice  No.  915  —  E.  Bailey 150.00 

Invoice  No  916  —  S.  M.  Obulinger 200 .00 

Dec.  23,  1915  —  Invoice  No'.  842  —  T.  B.  Evans 100.00 

Invoice  No.  838  —  B.  J.  Young 150 . 00 

Dec.  23,  1915  —  Invoice  No.  751  —  T.  B.  Evans 1,425.00 

Dec.  17,  1915  —  Invoice  No.   581  —  T.  B.  Evans 1,000  ..00 

These  items  are  for  Christmas  presents  and  strike  expenses  in 
the  case  of  Mr.  Loton  Horton,  and  in  connection  with  other  items 
I  would  call  your  attention  to  remarks  on  various  exhibits  attached 
hereto : 

EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Exhibit  No.  1  shows  net  trading  profit  on  milk  of  $329,311.43 
or  a  unit  net  profit  on  135,251,200  quarts  of  milk  purchased  of 
.00243.  This  is  determined  after  allowing  3%  per  cent,  profit  on 
all  purchases  other  than  fluid  milk,  the  total  of  which  including 
groceries  and  cream  amount  to  $792,727.97.  It  must  be  said  that 
this  statement  is  very  much  clouded  by  the  inclusion  herein  of  store 
expenses  which  expense  not  only  includes  the  cost  of  selling  milk 
but  also  includes  the  cost  of  selling  groceries.  If  it  were  possible 
to  determine  the  amount  of  sale  of  milk,  cream  and  butter  that  was 
made  in  the  stores,  it  would  be  a  comparatively  simple  matter  to 
determine  the  relative  cost  of  distributing  milk  in  the  stores  as 
compared  with  the  cost  of  distributing  it  on  the  route  as  will  be 
shown  in  other  companies.  It  will  be  noted  upon  examination  of 
Schedule  No.  1  supporting  this  exhibit,  that  the  store  sales  repre- 
sent about  13%  per  cent  of  the  total  sales  and  this  is  enough  to 
make  the  figures  contained  herein  of  less  value  than  they  ordinar- 
ily might  be.  I  would  call  your  attention,  under  the  heading  of 
"  Manufacturing  Expenses,"  to  the  fact  that  the  operations  of  the 
farms,  ice,  the  pasteurization  expenses  in  the  country  and  in  the 
city,  and  also  pasteurization  expenses  of  $10,598.43,  which  were 
included  originally  as  a  charge  to  the  cost  of  milk,  are  all  herein 
included  under  the  heading  of  "  Manufacturing  Expenses  "  al- 
though some  of  these  expenses  are  partly  in  connection  with  the 
production  of  Farm  Products.  Pasteurization  expenses  originally 
charged  to  milk  is  an  item  for  which  the  Sheffield  Farms  Slawson- 
Decker  Company  paid  the  William  Evans  Dairy  Company  at  the 
rate  of  twenty-five  cents  (.25)  a  can  to  pasteurize  milk  and  it  is 


484 

recommended  herein  that  considerable  information  might  be  ob- 
tained from  witnesses  who  are  in  a  position  to  testify  to  the  cost  of 
this  very  important  operation.  Particularly  would  I  suggest  that 
testimony  in  connection  with  the  cost  of  pasteurization  be  obtained 
from  these  witnesses,  as  in  a  practical  way  it  will  more  or  less  con- 
firm or  refute  the  costs  shown  in  other  companies  where  a  theoreti- 
cal distribution  of  expenses  is  made.  It  is  also  recommended  that 
the  item  of  waste  could  be  very  well  determined  in  instances  of 
this  kind  where  one  company  having  pasteurization  of  products 
performed  by  another  would  be  more  particular  to  determine  the 
returns  in  connection  with  any  order  given. 

As  referred  to  aforesaid,  the  figures  obtained  for  manufacturing 
expenses  are  of  little  value  when  it  is  considered  that  incidental 
activities  are  engaged  in  which  are  not  altogether  a  part  of  the 
production  of  milk. 

The  delivery  expenses  are  made  on  the  best  information  that 
is  obtainable,  but  no  comparison  of  the  cost  of  efficiency  of  opera- 
tion of  various  branches  can  be  shown  without  a  complete  reaii- 
alysis  and  distribution  of  various  expenses  contained  herein.  I 
would  call  your  particular  attention  to  items  of  clerks'  and  can- 
vassers' wages,  of  $181,135.46,  and  testimony  in  connection  with 
this  item  might  reveal  the  means  by  which  this  company  obtains 
its  new  business.  The  store  expenses  herein  are  applicable  both 
to  the  sale  of  milk  and  groceries.  The  milk,  as  will  be  shown  here- 
inafter in  connection  with  Exhibit  No.  3,  is  charged  to  the  stores 
at  an  arbitrary  figure  which  I  believe  can  easily  be  proven  mere 
guess  work.  The  profit  as  shown  by  the  stores  account  in  the  gen- 
eral ledger  is  in  excess  of  the  profit  as  shown  by  a  profit  and  loss 
account  of  their  auditors  by  about  $20,000,  and  an  examination 
of  Exhibit  No.  3  contained  herein  would  show  that  the  profits  on 
the  stores  are  very  nearly  $18,000  less  than  either  of  the  afore- 
said figures;  this  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  there  may  be  no 
charge  for  delivery  expenses  to  the  store  and  no  apportionment  of 
company's  general  administration  expenses  included  in  the  cost 
shown.  A  little  study  of  other  reports  delivered  to  you  should  pro- 
vide sufficient  information  for  you  to  prove  in  your  own  mind  that 
these  charges  are  erroneous.  The  administrative  expenses  con- 
tained herein  show  officers'  salaries  of  $95,696.78,  including  an 


485 

officer  in  charge  of  building  repairs.  In  this  connection  I  would 
call  your  attention  to  Bill  No.  242  of  June  9,  for  $8,000,  and  Bill 
No.  755  on  June  23,  for  $9,000,  paid  on  account  of  constructing  a 
Long  Island  City  building  for  the  company  to  Mr.  Ralph  Horton, 
presumably  the  contractor.  The  special  advertising  contained 
herein,  $2,682.22,  is  an  item  for  charitable  advertising.  The  strike 
expenses  of  $19,706.60  are  items  payable  to  detective  agencies 
and  in  many  instances  to  officers  of  the  company,  including  T.  W. 
Decker,  and  Loton  Horton  in  round  sums  for  which  no  vouchers 
can  be  found.  In  connection  with  the  reserve  for  bad  debts,  I  would 
also  call  your  attention  to  an  item  of  $14,305,  charged  to  reserve 
for  uncollectable  accounts  during  1915  which  was  part  of  the 
advances  made  to  a  paper  bottle  company  to  experiment  in  paper 
bottles.  This  company  has  also  advanced  other  moneys  in  connec- 
tion with  the  manufacture  of  these  bottles,  all  of  which  is  sup- 
posed to  be  secured.  I  would  also  call  your  attention  to  a  loan 
made  by  H.  S.  Tuttle  to  the  Pyroform  Bottle  Company,  for  $4,- 
204.85  which  was  afterwards  taken  up  by  the  Sheffield  Farms 
Slawson-Decker  Company  and  charged  to  loans  receivable. 

The  charges  for  bottles,  caps  and  cans  appear  to  be  somewhat 
higher  than  similar  charges  of  other  companies.  The  net  charges 
aforesaid  for  milk  purchased,  after  deducting  3%  per  cent,  for 
profits  on  outside  purchases,  only  leave  a  net  profit  of  $329,311.43, 
while  the  net  profit  from  all  trading  operations  show  a  profit  of 
$355,075.09  to  which,  when  added  sundry  items  of  income  from 
other  sources,  leaves  a  net  profit  for  the  year  of  $390,519.30. 

EXHIBIT  No.  2 

The  balance  sheet  of  the  company  includes  an  investment  of 
$87,000.00  in  the  Louvain  Construction  Company  and  a  good-will 
item  of  $302,243.51.  There  is  also  an  item  of  investments 
amounting  to  $479,782.05,  details  of  which  are  set  up  in  Exhibit 
No.  2,  herein,  the  principal  item  of  which  is  contained  in  the 
stock  of  the  Sheffield  Farms  Bi-Prodiict  Company.  It  is  recom- 
mended herewith  in  connection  with  this  company  that  an  ex- 
amination of  the  books  of  account  of  same  might  reveal  informa- 
tion that  would  be  of  interest  and  constructive  value  to  the  Com- 
mittee. In  connection  with  the  outstanding  capital  stock  may  I 


486 

call  jour  attention  to  the  fact  that  additional  issues  of  this  stock 
were  made  during  the  year  at  a  charge  of  7%  per  cent,  for  under- 
writing expenses  which  might  appear  to  be  rather  high  in  view 
of  the  regular  dividend  paying  qualities  of  this  stock  and  it  is 
thought  it  might  be  of  interest  to  the  Committee  to  call  attention 
to  this  fact. 

The  dividends  for  the  year,  as  noted  herein  were  six  per  cent. 
on  the  preferred  stock  and  twelve  per  cent,  on  the  outstanding 
common  stock  of  $1,000,000. 

I  am  also  attaching  hereto  Schedule  No.  1  of  Exhibit  No.  2 
showing  the  additions  and  deductions  during  the  year  of  plant 
and  property  assets. 

EXHIBIT  No.  3 

In  connection  with  this  exhibit  showing  the  charges  for  milk  to 
stores  I  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  the  proven  discrepancies 
that  exist  on  the  books  of  the  company  showing  that  there  was  a 
net  undercharge  for  milk  to  the  stores  department  of  about  $18,- 
000.  I  would  also  call  your  attention  to  the  high,  low  and  average 
prices  that  milk  is  charged  to  stores  during  the  year  and  to  recom- 
mend to  you  that  the  fullest  information  be  obtained  as  to  how 
these  prices  are  determined  upon.  It  will  be  noted  that  grade 
"A"  milk  is  charged  to  the  stores  at  an  average  of  less  than  7% 
cents,  the  selling  price  of  which  is  11  cents.  It  will  also  be  noted 
that  the  charge  of  certified  milk  is  a  little  over  9  cents,  the  selling 
price  of  which  is  1 5  cents. 


487 


EXHIBIT  No.  1 

SHEFFIELD JF ARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 
Unit  Cost  Statement  of  Operations  Based  on  135,251,200  Quarts  of  Milk  Purchased 


Amount 

Unit 
cost 

Amount 

Unit 
selling  price 

Sales  

$10,832,709  40 

.08009 

Purchase  

$5,082,154  35 

.03757 

Freight  

938,552  25 

.00694 

Manufacturing  expense  .  .  . 

1,500,245  55 

.01109 

Bottles,  caps  and  cans  

386,352  16 

.00286 

Delivery  expense  

1,839,162  42 

.01360 

Store  expense.  .  . 

298,870  62 

00221 

Administration  expense  

458,060  62 

.00339 

Total.... 

$10,503,397  97 

.07766 

Net  trading  profit  

329,311  43 

.00243 

$10,832,709  40 

.08009 

$10,832,709  40 

.08009 

Sales 

Outside  purchase  of,  $792,727.97  plus  an  arbitrary  3i  per  cent  profit  to 
determine  sales  of  fluid  milk  purchased,  sold  as  milk,  cream,  butter,  etc., 
equals 


Purchase 

Outside  purchases  of,  $792,727.97  deducted. 


$11,651,201  03 


818,491  63 
$10,832,709  40 

$5,874,882  32 
792,727  97 

$5,082,154  35 


EXHIBIT  JSTo.  1-A 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 
Summary  Profit  and  Loss  Account,  January  1,  1915,  to  December  31,  1915 

$11,651,201  03 


Sales  

Purchases  

$5,874,882  32 

.5032% 

Freight  

938,552  25 

0804% 

Manufacturing  expenses  

1,500,245  55 

.  1285% 

Bottles,  caps  and  cans    .  .  . 

386,352  16 

0339% 

Delivery  expense 

1,839  162  42 

1576% 

Store  expense  

298,870  62 

.0256% 

Administration  expense 

458,060  62 

0399% 

Total  

$11,296,125  94 

Net  trading  profit  

355,075  09 

.0304% 

Total  

$11,651,201  03 

Net  trading  profit  brought  down  

$355,075  09 

Additional  income 

35  444  21 

Net  profit  .  . 

$390,519  30 

$11,651,201  03 


488 


SCHEDULE  1  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  1-A 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 

Detailed  Statement  of  Profit  and  Losses,  January  1,  1915,  to  December  31,  1915 

Sales: 

By  routes .  .  $9 , 873 , 808  63 

By  stores 1,629,234  37 

By  ioe  plant 67, 827  03 

By  creameries 22,384  04 

Gullet 8,203  92 

By  products 49 , 743  04 

Total  sales $11,651,201  03 

Quarts  Amount 

Raw  milk  purchased 132,999,011       $4,890,17023 


Certified  milk  purchased .  . 
Brookside  milk  purchased. , 

Buttermilk  purchased 

Cream  purchased. 


2,098,390  172,356  01 

150,079  19,516  51 

3,720  111  60 

1,000,485  361,605  13 


Condensed  milk 6,646  78 

Cheese 1,11835 

Merchandise  purchased 430,919  26 

Total $5,882,443  87 

Less  increase  in  inventory 7 , 561  55 

— $5,874,882  32 

Freight 938,552  25 

Manufacturing  expenses: 

Creamery  wages $486, 644  36 

Fuel 127,510  83 

Creamery  miscellaneous 15,021  60 

Maintenance  and  machinery 71 ,347  67 

Maintenance  and  dairy  equipment 45 , 884  20 

Machine  oil 6 , 503  78 

Creamery  stables 3,355  39 

Maintenance  of  country  buildings 65,595  69 

Milk  department  wages -. 102 , 195  86 

Shipping  cases 31 , 225  63 

Milk  department,  miscellaneous  supplies 

expense 5,946  73 

Certifications 7, 109  97 

Gas  and  electricity 9 , 146  49 

Engine  room  wages 58,347  57 

Maintenance  city  buildings 34 , 216  08 

Laboratory  expenses 11 ,330  05 

Cleansing  compounds 14 , 345  33 

Refrigerating  chemicals 4 , 402  87 

Machine  shop  wages 28,722  87 

Creamery  suits 9,251  99 

Ice  harvest 48,000  00 

Rent  and  power 13,909  42 

Bottle  and  can  brushes 3 ,919  09 

Water  taxes 22,871  02 

Farm  miscellaneous  supplies  and  expenses  1 , 016  32 

Fertilizers 2  10 

Farm  wages 5,897  47 

Electricity  on  Hobart  farm 222  54 

Farm  feed 5,045  11 

Farm  building  repairs 19  33 

Wagon  shop 24, 245  32 

Tin  shop 12,044  02 

Shipping  tags 757  13 

Grain  seed 182  22 

Ice  pond,  Fitch 1,645  97 

Ice    pond,    New    Haven    Junction    and 

Easton,  N.  Y. 1 ,620  65 

Well— Charlotte 2,910  00 

Light  and  power  plant 2,797  45 

Depreciation  on  machinery 99, 126  85 

Depreciation  on  buildings 65,236  56 

Fermilac  supplies  and  expense 27 , 303  70 

Royalties 25,484  97 

By-products 7, 872  16 

Hobart  farm 55  87 

Pasteuring  expense 10 , 598  43 

(Erroneously  charged  to  milk) $1 , 520 , 888  66 


489 


Less  credits: 

Increase  on  inventory $8,492  93 

Sundry  rent 1, 174  16 

Franklinville  ice  pond 602  05 

Team  work  Hobart  farm .  .  729  00 

Farm  product  sales '. .  .         9,644  97 

$20,643  11 

$1,500,245  55 

Delivery  expenses: 

Discounts  on  routes $54 , 277  42 

Ice  purchased 20,416  31 

Harness  repairs 2,216  52 

Wagon  repairs 43 , 132  22 

Cartage  and  horse  hire 18 , 387  07 

Motor  car  repairs 15 , 339  19 

Motor  car  expenses 10,335  08 

Drivers  and  inspectors'  wages 1,030,276  92 

Stablemen,  wages 107,727  09 

Feed  and  bedding 201 ,291  55 

Shoeing 31 ,907  92 

Harness  shop 9,974  42 

Stable  miscellaneous  supplies  and  equip- 
ment    13 , 343  89 

Stable  rents 10 , 665  00 

Drivers'  uniforms 3 , 254  75 

Clerks'  and  canvassers'  wages 181 , 135  46 

Drivers'  commissions 17,042  85 

Creamery  packages 2,722  30 

Depreciation  on  horses 31 , 588  40 

Depreciation  on  wagons 13 , 374  45 

Depreciation  on  auto  trucks 15,645  81 

Depreciation  on  harness 4,067  44 

Depreciation  on  blankets 3 , 163  41 

Total $1,841,285  47 

Less  increase  on  inventory 2, 123  05 

1,839,162  42 

Store  expenses: 

Store  rents $80,715  92 

Store  wages 147,815  10 

Store  miscellaneous  supplies  and  wages . .  20 , 943  60 

Merchandise  department  wages 2,670  98 

Store  ice • 14,646  52 

Store  gas  and  electricity 7 , 830  29 

Store  telephone 3 , 365  91 

Store  postage 1 , 316  96 

Store  horse  hire 2, 520  00 

Merchandise  packages 16,746  33 

Discounts  and  allowances 299  01 

298,870  62 

Administration  expenses: 

Officers'  and  superintendent's  salaries .  . .  $95 , 696  78 

Telephone  and  telegraph 9 , 598  10 

Printing  and  stationery 11,321  31 

Traveling  expenses 12, 781  24 

Postage 9 , 384  04 

General  miscellaneous  supplies  and  ex- 
penses   21,333  55 

Watchmen,  elevatormen  and  cleaners...  14,919  30 

Advertising 38 , 659  52 

Special  advertising 2, 682  20 

Employees'  Mutual  Benefit  Association. .  950  00 

Shortage  unsecured 607  30 

Insurance  premiums 45 , 587  44 

Legal  expenses 12,029  54 

Pensions 1 , 239  28 

Internal  revenue 651  83 

Electric  sign — Manhattan  street  (adver- 
tising)    4,965  00 

Strike  expenses 19 , 607  60 

Reserve  for  depreciation  of  furniture  and 

fixtures 17,517  54 

Reserve  for  bad  debts 40,530  94 

Taxes 61,171  68 

Interest  paid $43,331  32 

Interest  earned ...  6 , 504  89 


Interest,  net 36,826  43 

458,060  62 


490 


Bottles  and  caps: 

Milk  bottles $141,317  09 

Pint  bottles 82, 101  41 

Cream  bottles 18,933  38 

Milk  Federation  (bottle  exchange) 46,565  29 

Cans 50,804  40 

Milk  cans 49 , 778  31 


Total $389,499  88 

Less  increase  on  inventory 3 , 147  72 

$386,352  16 


Grand  total  cost  of  product  and  expenses $11,296,125  94 

Net  trading  profit 355,075  09 

$11,651,201  03 

Net  trading  profit  brought  down $355,075  09 

Income  from  rents 5,281  58 

Compensation  for  damages 1 , 052  46 

Checks  not  cashed 276  72 

Interest  on  deposits 1 , 131  00 

Anticipated  profit  on  butter 2,603  95 

Dividends  on  investments 25 , 098  50 

Net  profit $390,519  30 


491 

EXHIBIT  Eo.  2 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 
Balance  Sheet  as  of  December  31,  1915 

ASSETS,  1915 

Good  will  as  per  books $302,436  51 

Plant  and  property  (as  per  books,  see  Schedule  1) 4 ,473 , 500  78 

Hobart  farm  investment,  live  stock  and  farm  utensils  as  per  books 10,333  74 

Investments,  book  value  (as  per  Schedule  2 479 , 782  05 

Louvain  Construction  Company 87 , 000  00 

Inventory  and  current  assets: 
Inventory: 

Creamery  products $43,578  66 

Stores  merchandise 32 , 250  88 

By-products 

Gullet 990  00 

Miscellaneous 71  45 

Supplies 250,891  38 


Total $327,782  37 

Butter  in  storage  (at  January,  1915,  market  price)  39,066  00 

366,848  37 

Current  assets: 

Accounts  receivable $517,010  99 

Accounts  on  collection  department 9,360  69 

Sheffield  By-Products  Company 1 ,304  75 

Notes  receivable 5,613  25 

Rents  receiviable 137  00 

Mortgage  loans 300  00 


Total $533,726  68 

Less  reserve  for  doubtful  accounts 21 ,000  00 


$512,726  68 

Cash: 

In  banks $272,478  64 

In  office 11,711  20 

Petty  cash  funds 12,770  00 


Total $296,959  84 

Deposit  on  meters,  etc 20  00 

809,706  52 


$6.529,607  97 

CAPITAL  AND  LIABILITIES,  1915 
Capital  stock: 

Common  authorized $1,200,00000      $1,000,00000 

Preferred: 

Authorized 1,500,000  00 

Unissued 337,60000         1,495,70000 

$2,495,700  00 

Subscription  to  new  preferred  capital  stock 2,360  00 

Mortgages  on  property  owned 684,200  00 

Current  liabilities  : 

Accounts  payable $676 , 745  66 

Notes  payable 2,000  00 

Drivers'  security  fund 161 , 177  99 

Accrued  interest 9,412  78 

Accrued  taxes 8,999  00 

858,335  43 

Reserves: 

For  unrecorded  liabilities $7,000  00 

For  accident  liability 48,460  25 

For  ice  harvest 43,983  54 

For  fire  insurance 37,436  54 

For  workmen's  compensation  liability 2,463  13 

139,343  46 

Surplus: 

Balance,  December  31,  1914 $2,183,177  78 

Less  underwriters'  commissions 24 , 750  00 

2,158,427  78 

Net  profits  for  the  year 390,519  30 


$2,548,947  08 
Deduct: 

Dividends  on  preferred  stock,  6% $79,278  00 

Dividends  on  common  stock,  12% 120,000  00 

199,278  00 

Surplus,  as  at  December  31,  1915 2,349,669  08 

$6,529,607  97 


492 


SCHEDULE  1  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  2 
SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 

Comparative  Statement  of  Plant  and  Property  as  at  December  31,  1914,  and 

December  31,  1915 


December  31, 
1914 

Additions 
1915 

Deductions 
during 
1915 

Net 
December  31, 
1915 

Land 

$788,925  00 

§23  457  00 

$275  00 

$812  107  00 

Buildings  

2,164,459  65 

214,334  59 

65,838  27 

2,312,955  98 

Fittings  and  furnishings  
Machinery  and  fixed  plant  .  .  . 
Horses 

117,237  65 
747,465  38 
203,000  00 

45,781  89 
86,059  60 
60  906  50 

17,517  54 
99,126  85 
39  381  50 

145,502  00 
734,398  13 
224  525  00 

Wagons,  trucks  and  sleighs  .  .  . 
Motor  cars 

156,960  00 
33,194  04 

31,428  95 
17,700  95 

14,856  95 
16  345  81 

173,532  00 
34  549  18 

25,789  54 

4,363  20 

2,867  44 

27,285  30 

Blankets  and  horse  covers  

8,110  45 

3,706  16 

3,170  41 

8,646  20 

Total 

$4,245,141  71 

$487  738  84 

$259  379  77 

$4  473  500  78 

/  Sales, 
I  Dep., 


$9,659.31 
249,720.46 


SCHEDULE  2  OF  EXHIBIT  No.  2 

SHEFFIELD  FARMS  SLAWSON  DECKER  COMPANY 

Statement  of  Outside  Investments  at  December  31,  1915 


NAME 

Number 
of  shares 

Book  value 

1 

Milk  Bottlers'  Federation 

5 

$50  00 

2. 

8 

R.  R.  Mlik  Shippers  and  Can  Collecting  Co  
Dairymen's  Manufacturing  Company 

5 
3 

50  00 
240  00 

4 

Pyraf  orm  Bottle  Manufacturing  Company  

5,000  00 

^ 

Jen  sen  Creamery  Machinery  Company 

50 

5  000  00 

6 

An  des  Creamery  Company  ...            

30 

3,000  00 

7 

Sheffield  By-Products  Company,  common 

107 

10  700  00 

8 

Sheffield  By-  Products  Company,  preferred  

3,750 

424,004  55 

q 

Delhi  Co-operative  Creamery  Company 

120 

15  000  00 

\0 

New  York  City  bonds    ...                                                 . 

14  bonds 

13,737  50 

($4  ,  000  Corporation  stock,  $10  ,  000  Rapid  Transit) 
Howell  Condensed  Milk  Company  bonds      

3,000  00 

$479,782  05 

493 


^00<N-^>Oti       10 


OWCQOOOOCfe 


494 


EXHIBIT  No.  3  —  (Continued) 

ERRORS  MADE  IN  CHARGING  MILK  TO  STORES 

January,  3,267  quarts  "  P  P  "  milk  charged  at  6J  cents $2 , 123  55 

January,  3,267  quarts  "  P  P  "  milk  should  be 212  35 

Net  overcharge  to  stores $1,911  20 

February,  26,171  quarts  buttermilk  charged  at  3% $785  13 

February,  26,171  quarts  buttermilk  should  be 668  13 

Net  undercharge  to  store $117  00 

March,  84$  quarts,  grade  "  A  "  cream  charged  at  80  cents $67  80 

March,  84$  quarts,  grade  "  A  "  cream  should  be 67  60 

Net  overcharge  to  stores $0     20 

September: 

Charges  as  follows: 

Product                                                 Quantity                Rate  Amount 

"  Household  "  milk 173,199  quarts                  .06  $10,391  94 

"  Household  "  milk 153,662  pints                     .03  4,60986 

Grade  "A"  milk 1,024  pints                    .05  5120 

Dipped  milk 371 ,340  quarts                  .05  18,567  00 

"PP"milk 3,914  quarts                  .06  23484 

Grade  "A"  milk 42,200  quarts                   .08  3,37600 

Certified  milk 4, 192  quarts                    .09  377  28 

Brookside  milk 79  quarts                  .  14  11  06 

Buttermilk 80,719  quarts                   .03  2,42157 

Cream  X 22,896  quarts                  .36  8,242  56 

Cream  XX 361  quarts                  .46  16606 

Cream,  grade  "  A  " 16  quarts                  .80  12  80 

Cream,  sour 8, 174  quarts                  .25  2,043  50 

Condensed  milk 327  quarts                   .  16  52  32 

"  Fermilac  " 24, 116  splits                    .06  1 ,446  96 

$52,004  95 

Charged  in  journal  No  3,  folio  277 32,004  95 

Undercharges  to  stores ...  $20 , 000  00 


REPORT 

TO 

JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 

ON 

OPERATING,  MANUFACTURING  AND  DELIVERY  COSTS  OF  MILK, 
ALEX.  CAMPBELL  MILK  COMPANY,  INC.,  802  FULTON 
STREET,  BROOKLYN,  NEW  YORK,  JANUARY  1,  1915  —  DE- 
CEMBER 31,  1915 


[495] 


496 


OPERATING,  MANUFACTURING  AND  DELIVERY 
COSTS  OF  MILK 

October  30,  1916. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry,  Capitol f  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

GENTLEMEN. —  Agreeable  to  your  request  I  am  attaching  hereto 
a  report  of  manufacturing,  operating  and  distributing  costs  of  milk 
as  shown  by  the  records  of  the  Alex.  Campbell  Milk  Company, 
Inc.,  of  802  Fulton  street,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

I  am  also  attaching  hereto  sundry  exhibits  and  schedules  sup- 
porting the  report,  as  per  index. 

Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 
Certified  Public  Accountant. 


497 

KEPORT 

ALEX.  CAMPBELL  MILK  COMPANY,  INC.,  802  FULTON  STREET, 

BROOKLYN,  N.  Y. 

The  Alex.  Campbell  Milk  Company,  Inc.,  is  a  corporation  with 
an  authorized  capital  of  $500,000,  50  per  cent  preferred  stock 
and  50  per  cent  common  stock,  of  which  $250,000  of  the  preferred 
stock  and  $203,200  common  stock  has  been  issued. 

This  company  conducts  a  general  retail  milk  business  through 
the  medium  of  seven  branches  operating  a  total  of  about  two  hun- 
dred and  thirty-four  routes,  of  which  the  retail  business  is  92 
per  cent  of  their  total  output,  and  the  figures  shown  on  the  various 
statements  herewith  would  indicate  this  company  to  be  a  fair 
example  from  which  to  judge  just  what  operating  and  delivery 
costs  should  be. 

The  report  as  herein  contained  is  for  the  calendar  year  1915, 
and  the  figures  given  show  a  net  profit  of  $75,243.11  on  total  fluid 
milk  purchased. 

That  the  business  of  this  company  is  mainly  the  purchase  and 
sale  of  milk  is  very  plainly  shown  by  the  fact  that  of  the  total 
purchases  amounting  to  $909,529.27,  only  $18,000  is  for  the  pur- 
chase of  by-products.  The  total  quantity  of  milk  purchased  for 
the  year  amounted  to  25,320,596  quarts  and  the  disposition  of 
this  product,  75  per  cent  of  which  was  in  the  state  of  fluid  milk 
and  25  per  cent  in  cream  and  other  by-products  netted  a  gross 
return  of  .076799  cents  per  quart. 

EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Exhibit  No.  1,  attached  hereto,  shows  a  net  profit  of  .00297  cents 
per  quart  on  total  quarts  of  milk  purchased  and  disposed  of,  either 
as  milk,  cream  or  other  by-products,  or  a  net  profit  on  sales  of  3.8 
per  cent.  The  income  from  milk  purchased  is  arrived  at  by  al- 
lowing a  profit  of  5  per  cent  on  incidental  by-products  purchased 
at  a  cost  of  $18,214.65  as  shown  by  Statement  A  of  Exhibit  No.  1. 
The  cost  of  milk  is  the  actual  amount  paid  for  all  fluid  milk  pur- 
chased. It  is  interesting  to  note  in  connection  with  the  cost  of 
this  milk  that  the  farmer  got  46  per  cent  of  the  total  amount  re- 
ceived from  the  sale  of  same,  or  over  three  and  one-half  (.03%) 


498 

for  every  quart  that  lie  sold.  It  is  also  interesting  to  note  that  a 
fine  analysis  of  all  operating  expense  charges  in  conducting  this 
business  shows  a  delivery  cost  of  1.7  cents  per  quart  details  of 
which  the  shown  by  Schedules  1  to  6  of  Exhibit  No.  1. 

EXHIBITS  Nos.  2  and  3 

The  analysis  of  charges  shown  herewith  in  connection  with 
operating  country  stations  is  somewhat  clouded  by  the  unreliable 
records  of  milk  handled  at  each  station.  Transfers  between  sta- 
tions for  whatever  convenience  may  have  been  afforded  in  ship- 
ping or  separating,  making  cheese,  butter,  etc.,  has  reduced  the 
value  of  the  unit  costs  shown  because  of  the  apparent  incorrect- 
ness of  net  quantities  handled  at  each  station.  It  will  be  noted, 
however,  that  large  quantities  of  over  1,000,000  quarts,  even  where 
there  is  separating  and  cheese  making  in  connection  with  the  hand- 
ling of  the  product,  is  carried  on  at  a  lower  unit  cost  per  quart 
than  at  some  other  stations  where  there  is  no  milk  used  in  by 
products  but  at  which  there  is  a  smaller  quantity  handled. 

The  details  of  expenses,  as  shown  on  Exhibit  No.  3,  while  they 
are  legitimate,  do  not  show  the  actual  costs  of  operating  stations  as 
would  be  shown,  if  actual  cost  records  were  maintained,  and  as 
will  be  shown  in  reports  of  other  companies  later. 

The  disproportionate  charge  in  some  cases  for  repairs  and  re- 
newals and  general  expenses,  are  the  result  of  an  unscientific  dis- 
tribution of  these  charges  due  to  poor  accounting  methods. 

The  statements  herewith  will,  no  doubt,  be  valuable  for  com- 
parative purposes. 

EXHIBIT  No.  4 

This  company  has  made  some  effort  in  connection  with  the 
proper  distribution  of  expenses,  to  ascertain  delivery  costs  in  so 
far  as  actual  expenses  chargeable  to  each  selling  branch  have  been 
kept.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  points  of  delivery,  figured  on  the 
retail  sales  only,  show  an  average  cost  of  2.4  cents  per  point,  and 
where  the  wholesale  sales  are  but  7.8  per  cent,  the  actual  unit 
point  cost  of  delivery  is  not  very  much  exaggerated. 

I  would  call  your  attention  to  a  particular  phase  of  this  com- 
pany's business  in  shipping  milk  to  Hempstead  and  Eockville  Gen- 


499 

ter  on  Long  Island,  by  train,  the  freight  for  which  is  reflected 
in  an  increased  unit  cost  per  point  of  delivery  of  about  one  cent, 
although  there  is  a  very  marked  decrease  in  the  actual  proportion 
of  wages  paid  to  total  branch  expenses,  as  compared  with  other 
branches.  The  difference  in  the  increased  unit  cost  per  point  of 
delivery,  as  shown  herewith,  and  the  actual  delivery  costs  per 
quart  of  milk  as  shown  on  Exhibit  No.  1,  is  due  of  course  to  the  in- 
clusion of  all  branch  expenses  on  Exhibit  No.  5  allowing  for  actual 
points  delivered  only,  while  the  unit  cost  per  quart  on  Exhibit  No. 
1  is  reduced  because  of  the  assumption  that  the  25,620,000  quarts 
of  milk  purchased  was  actually  delivered. 

EXHIBIT  No.  5 

The  statement  of  quantities  of  milk  and.  cream  sold  and  prices 
received  for  same  show  an  increased  cost  to  the  consumer  of  about 
one  cent  ($.01)  per  point  over  the  cost  to  the  wholesaler,  although 
in  some  cases,  can  milk  is  supposed  to  be  sold  at  retail  for  less 
than  it  is  sometimes  sold  wholesale.  (See  charge  for  rebates  on 
Exhibit  No.  6.) 

EXHIBIT  No.  6 

The  profit  and  loss  statement  shown  herewith  has  been  examined 
as  to  the  legitimacy  of  the  charges  contained  therein.  It  will  be 
noted  that  a  record  kept  by  this  company  shows  rebates  of  over 
$4,000  to  the  wholesale  dealers  and  gratis  milk  of  over  $5,000. 

There  is  an  erroneous  procedure  adopted  by  this  company  of 
charging  profit  and  loss  with  depreciation  on  property  and  plants 
instead  of  maintaining  reserve  accounts  to  show  the  actual  amount 
charged  for  depreciation.  This  procedure  is  carried  out  also  in 
connection  with  furniture  and  fixtures,  and  other  properties.  No 
stock  records  are  maintained  of  bottles  or  cans  and  the  inventory 
set  up  at  the  end  of  the  year  is  an  arbitrary  one,  and  the  correct- 
ness for  the  charge  of  bottles,  herein,  will  be  better  determined 
by  statements  of  other  companies,  as  they  are  set  up  hereafter. 
An  examination  of  the  expense  accounts  has  been  made,  and  also 
of  the  accounts,  "  dues  and  donations,"  and  nothing  therein  con- 
tained can  be  considered  to  have  been  paid  that  is  not  in  accord- 


500 

ance  with  proper  business  practices.  The  proper  charges  for  items 
such  as  advertising  will  also  be  better  determined  by  a  comparison 
with  other  statements. 

EXHIBIT  No.  7 

The  balance  sheet  herewith  has  not  been  verified  completely  as 
to  its  correctness.  The  stocks  and  bonds  and  securities  include 
$500  of  the  New  York  Milk  Exchange  and  $500  of  the  Dairy- 
mens'  Manufacturing  Company.  The  dividends  of  this  company 
show  payments  of  7  per  cent  on  the  preferred  stock  and  8  per  cent 
on  the  common  stock.  Probably  $65,000  of  the  $78,000  mort- 
gages payable  is  held  by  Alex.  Campbell,  now  the  Alex.  Campbell 
estate,  on  which  interest  is  paid  regularly. 

In  conclusion,  if  there  is  any  other  information  in  connection 
with  this  company's  activities  that  my  working  papers  will  reveal, 
I  will  be  glad  at  any  time  to  prepare  any  report  that  you  may 
request  in  connection  with  same. 


501 


EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Statement  Showing  Return  on  25,258,976  Quarts  Milk  Purchased  and  Sold  Either 
in  the  Form  of  Fluid  Milk,  Cream,  Butter,  Cheese  or  Condensed  Milk 


Amount 

Amount 

Unit 
costs, 
expenses 

Unit 
selling 
price 

Sales,  as  per  Statement  "A"  . 

$1,939,863  14 

$0.076799 

Cost  of  milk 

$393  286  59 

$6  035365 

Delivery     charges     as     per 
schedule  I 

437,687  95 

017328 

Country     charges,     as     per 
schedule  II  

86,997  66 

.003444 

Freight 

158,174  06 

006262 

Manufacturing  expenses,  as 
per  schedule  III  .  . 

122,462  08 

004848 

Bottles,  etc.,  as  per  schedule 
IV                

51,527  81 

.002040 

Administration  expenses,  as 
per  schedule  V  

72,761  76 

.002881 

Branch     expenses,     as     per 
schedule  VI 

41,722  12 

001652 

Total  cost  and  expenses. 

$1,864,620  03 

$0.073820 

Net  profit  

75,243  11 

.002979 

$1,939,863  14 

$1,939,863  14 

$0.076799 

$0.076799 

STATEMENT  A 

Gross  sales  as  per  profit  and  loss  statement $1,957,016  55 

Increase  in  inventory 1,971  97 


purchased  and  resold  costing  $18,214.65 


$1,958,988  52 
19,125  38 


Gross   income   from   milk   purchased,    as  per   Ex- 
hibit No.  1 .$1,939,863  14 


Total  quarts  milk  purchased 25,320,596  quarts 

Increase  of  inventory  of  $1,971.07  at  average 

yearly  cost  per  quart  equals 61,620  quarts 


Net  quarts  of  milk  included  as  sold '25,258,976  quarts 


502 

SCHEDULES  1-6  of  EXHIBIT  No.  1 

SCHEDULE  1 

Delivery  Charges 

Wages $250,255  21 

Freight 17,421  60 

Feed 53,044  43 

Harness  repairs 3 , 468  54 

Wagon  repairs 12, 570  31 

Auto  repairs 1 , 349  46 

Stables 5,652  54 

Ice 5,040  87 

Supplies 905  42 

Miscellaneous  expenses 10,468  86 

Commissions 14 , 578  18 

Stationery 4,674  09 

Hauling  wages 28,031  10 

Auto  repairs,  hauling 5 , 387  85 

Hauling,  stable  expenses 3 , 594  14 

Depreciation  charges 21 , 245  35 

$437,687  95 
SCHEDULE  2 

Country  Charges 

Wages ' $34,852  98 

Hauling  (country) 8, 125  40 

Coal 5,693  39 

Ice 8,533  46 

Repairs  and  renewals 6,654  89 

Rent 3,739  64 

Supplies 1,676  16 

Miscellaneous  expenses 7,268  16 

Telephones 305  23 

Taxes 1,500  43 

Insurance 1 , 394  80 

Depreciation 7 , 253  12 

$86,997  66 

SCHEDULE  3 

Manufacturing  Charges 

Wages $55,315  00 

Light  and  power 10 , 416  07 

Coal 7,224  95 

Feed 8,877  14 

Package  sundries 570  82 

Repairs  and  renewals 9,000  00 

Rents 3,231  24 

Miscellaneous  expenses 9 , 649  37 

Water  taxes 1 , 597  80 

Taxes 1 ,816  50 

Insurance 1 ,085  26 

Butter,  cheese  and  egg  expense 3 , 249  66 

$122,462  08 


503 

SCHEDULE  4 

Bottle  Expenses  and  Racks 

Racks  

$5,452  82 

Bottles  

25,859  81 

Cans  

6,415  92 

Caps  

9,572  93 

Certified  caps  

1,65072 

Bottle  premiums  
Bottle  federation  charges  

1,900  61 
675  00 

$51,527  81 

SCHEDULE  5 

Administration  Expenses 

Clerical  salaries  

$7,425  00 

Stationery  

262  42 

Advertising  

9,654  16 

Expenses  

5,350  70 

Traveling  

2,038  99 

Dues  and  donations  

1,515  80 

Interest  

4,99821 

Taxes  

2,163  61 

Insurance  

6,239  85 

Compensation  insurance  

210  61 

Depreciation  on  furniture  
Sundries  

910  57 
522  34 

Bad  accounts  

5,244  58 

Officers'  and  executive  salaries  

26,224  92 

$72,761  74 

SCHEDULE  6 

Branch  Expenses 

Salaries  

$10,868  00 

Light  and  power  

3,51360 

Coal  

638  96 

Repairs  and  renewals  

2,237  63 

Rent  

4,027  19 

Telephone  

2,52027 

Taxes  

1,883  36 

Insurance  

1,921  51 

Rebates  

4,012  51 

Gratis  milk  

5,353  57 

Route  waste  

1,786  80 

Allowances  

3,05872 

$41,822  12 


504 


O    -S 

Sf 

pp   e 

I— I      o 

tn  s 

X    -8 
pq   * 

s 

•& 

s 

1 

s 

I 


AS- 
H'S 


CQ 


CQ 


i<sn 


^COt"HGQOON»OOOCOCOCO' 
OOOOT^COt>OOiO**GO*ft»< 

cococococococococoro-*fc 


>l>t 

)  co  co  co  •*  c 
>OOOO< 


CO  LQ  >-K£>  i-H 


COCO 
O  Ci  C 


II  :£  I 

8^     '(M     • 


O3 
OO 


Srt<  l>  t-  «O  rf<  00  Tj<  1C  •<*  n  in  CO  O  O5  O  CO  CO  CO  00 
<N  »O  <N  "2  »-i  CO  i-i  CO  t»  *>•  1C  t^  <N  CO  l>  C5  •*>£>  CO 
O5  CO  O  O  t> -^«N  CC  M  1-1  C<1  i-i  CO  00  00  O  O  fO  »C  CD 


OOO'-iOCOCD»-iO<NOOO5CO'-iO>lO'-Ht^OOi-iCO  •  N  00 

iC  i-l  TJH  1C  l>-  CO  r-{  00  CO  •*  »O  t^  O  IN  CO  t>.  t^  CD  ••*  CO  -COIN 

O  O5  I-H  CO  (N  I-H  Oi  O  C<1 1C  O  00  O5  CS  ^t<  (M  00  >C  t^  00  •  rf<  O 

co  o  co  co  co  I-H  10  co  c^i  ob  cq  »o  oo  •<*  oo  ic  co  o  oj  o  -coco 

os"w «o »c t^oToo" &&•<# i-4*Qc*ao ot^moocid)  '•  ic <N" 

<N  >C  CO  iO  I-H  <N  I-H  I-H   ^H  <N  l>  CO  •*  U3  rj<  CO  ^  i-l  •  (N  ^H 


COi— lOii-Hi 


T-HT-<<NI-I      (M  IM  (N  r*  IN  <N  rH  rH  i 


t^  Ol  1C  1C  O  «O  rt<  ( 

I-H  rf  CO  O  CO  T)<  rj(  t 
<N  1C  U5  O  CT>  00  i-<  ( 


:82 

H  ^O  O  l>  *C  *O  CD  00  O5  CO  TH  T+(   •  t*»  f— ( 

JO oo o i-i T-HO: to oot>o<»    •Oi'O 


:.   g 

' 


505 


CO 


EH 

3  I 
E  S 


Si 

^ 


2    -3 

'3T3  g 


«  g 


:§§  : 


S    SKS 


•CO  •  -t^l>OOCD 

•0  ;  -OCXNSor- 

•  »O  •  -t^O5^CCOO 

••*  •  -OOiCt~-*iO 


t^OOO^O 

CO  O  !=!  O 


|8S 

•  14  >O 


oo^ccoKoco^oOOT^>o*ooool>t^ 


§>OO<N     • 
c^ot^    • 

O<N 
(M  «O 


O- 

o    • 


§i-H  rH  O  Tt<  T}<  T«  00  iO  »  t^  O  Tf  O  i-l  CO  t»  Tj*  CO  1C  •COM 

0  1  10  IN  rH  (N  rH  O5  Cq  00  1-1  0  CO  t^  t^  O  >O  •*  •*  •  ^H  t-. 

N  1C  O  Tt<  t^  d  •*?  O  <N  00  I-"  CO  t^  00  Tf<  O5  Tj*  CO  CO  CO  -i-it» 

TtnOOOOCDOCrti^-il>.iOC5!NOO(M'*CDTj<C5CO"5  -00(N 

V*Vi       <N(Nl>r-l(N       CD  CO  CO  T-I  CO  -^       lOCOCO'*  •  *#  CO 


§CO  fO  "H  CO  O>  O  •*  O  »O  00  I-H  1-1  C^  •*  Oi  ^  "O  O  iQ  -rfcO 

>O  Tt<  O5  CD  ^  O  I-H  •*  "5  •*  O5  Tj<  CO  t»  OS  CO  CJ  i-H  "5  •  00  CO 

O  ,_,  (^  t^  00  00  b-  O  CO  C6  -^  -^  t~  CO  00  •-I  >O  00  CO  OJ  -.-HO 

i-HiOOOO'OOO'-iOO>OrHiO>-HiO»OCOOOOCOCO!N  -i-iCD 

(N  (N  rH  rt  r-l  iO  rH  rt  rH  Tf  IM  CO  rj<  t^  (N  CO  <N  CO  •  <N 


' 

I^-I-S^S  a^^g 


506 


**    15 


8 


CD  t^  O  CO  00  rH  N 

i-l  CO  CD  »O  rH  C<)»O 
«D  O  <N  <N  t»  O>  O 


>  •*  CO  <N  CO  <N  <N 


IrHCO  M 


00  I-H  ^H  O5  >H 


§888888 

C4  ^  C 


i^  OOO 
i  OOO  Tf< 

>  ^   Oi   O 


1; 


i  aflj  i 
i 

>^a-e  & 


*& 


«Si 


IWoS 


507 


"Si 
If 


Ji 


11 


§§S 


I  lO  00  CD  Tj<  00  r-l 
)  ICiO  OTtH>O 
I  I-H  O5  O  CO  t-  <£> 


10000  O  *O  -<t  C5 
>  CO  CD  CO  O  *w  t"*> 

rr-Tr-TrHWr-ri-r 


•*  Tj<  00  »C  <N  »O  C 
<-lOOOO<-i< 


iM  CO  t~  O  N  CO  O 
.H^OSCOOXN 


•tf  td  O5  rH  Tf  CO  • 
t-rl        r-(        <N 


fl^filS^ti 

lllllri 


ii 

si 

Si: 
If 


J! 

a 


508 


EXHIBIT  No.  5 

Statement  Showing  Quantities  of  Various  Grades  of  Milk  Sold,  Wholesale  and 
Retail,  and  Prices  Received  for  Same 


PRODUCT 

RETAIL 

WHOLESALE 

Quantity 

Selling 
price 

Quantity 

Selling 
price 

Grade  A  quarts 

533,164 

518,442 
f           29,649 
\    11,895,913 
1,838,895 
524,977 
1,205,473 
88,042 
359,817 
162.771 
2,610 
58,450 
380,331 

$0.11 
.10 

|          .09 

.10 
.15 
.14 
.08 
.06 
.10 
.09 
.07| 

M 

4,669 
61 

1,045,303 

262| 
39,376 
154,022 
3,227 
18,272 

$0.10 
.09 

.08 

.08 
.12 
.13 
.07 
.05 

New  Era  Quarts 

Pasteurized  Quarts 

Pasteurized,  pints  

Certified,  quarts     

Cream,  jars               

Condensed,  jars  

Buttermilk,  quarts  

Pasteurized  quarts 

Grade  A  quarts 

Can  milk,  quarts  

163,837 
89,348 
86,531 
24,372 

198,159 
708 

.061 
.07 
.06 

.08 

.048 
.10 

Can  milk,  quarts  

Can  milk  quarts 

Can  milk  quarts 



Can  milk,  delivered  from  coun- 
try station  to  consumer.  .  .  . 
Certified  milk,  delivered  from 
country  station  to  consumer  . 

509 
EXHIBIT  No.  6 

Trading  and  Profit  and  Loss  Statement  January  1,  1915,  to  December  31,  1916 

Total  sales $1,957,016  55 

Less 

Route  waste $1 ,786  80 

Rebates 4,012  51 

Gratis  milk 5,353  57 

11,15288 


Total  net  sales $1 ,945,863  67 

Purchases 

Inventory    December    31, 

1914 $6,832  84 

Fluid  milk,  quarts 835,638  92 

Certified  milk,  quarts 57,647  77 

Cream 14,252  19 

Condensed  milk 3,626  50 

Butter...  335  96 


Total $918,334  18 

Less  inventory,  December  31, 
1915 8,804  81 


Total  net  purchases 909,529  27 

Trading  profit $1,036,334  40 

Operating  expenses  and  losses: 

Wages $387,990  72 

Freights 175,595  66 

Hauling  "  Arcade  " 8,125  40 

Light  and  power 13,929  67 

Coal 13,557  30 

Feed 61,921  57 

Harness  repairs,  etc 3,468  54 

Wagon  repairs  and  maintenance. . .  12,570  31 

Auto    repairs    and    maintenance....  6,73731 

Stable 9,246  68 

Racks 5,452  82 

Bottles 25,859  81 

Cans 6,415  92 

Caps 9,572  93 

Certified  caps 1 ,650  72 

Package  sundries 570  82 

Ice 13,574  33 

Repairs  and  renewals 17 ,892  52 

Rent 10,998  07 

Supplies 2,581  58 

Bottle  premiums 1 ,900  61 

Miscellaneous  expenses 27 ,286  39 

Cheese  expense 1 ,807  68 

Butter  expense 198  55 

Water  taxes 1,597  80 

$820,503  71 


510 

EXHIBIT  No.  6  (Continued) 

General  expenses: 

Salaries $26,224  92 

Commissions 14,578  18 

Telephones 2,825  50 

Stationery 4,936  51 

Advertising: 

Moving  pictures,  etc..  $1,134  90 
Newspapers,    periodi- 

pcals 4,09848 

Literature   and  pam- 

lets 2,127  78 

Signs  and  novelties. . .     1 , 593  25 
Programmes  and  sun- 
dries          699  75 

9,654  16 

Miscellaneous  expense 5,350  70 

Traveling 2,038  99 

Dues  and  donations 2, 190  80 

67,799  76 

Total $888,303  47 

Income  charges: 

Interest $4,998  21 

Taxes 7,363  90 

Insurance 10,641  42 

Allowances 3,058  72 

Accounts  rev.  written  off 5,244  58 

Compensation  insurance  expense 210  61 

31,517  44 

Depreciation: 

City  property  and  plants $10 , 428  27 

Creamery  property  and  plants 7,243  12 

Wagons,  trucks,  sleighs,  auto,  etc...  9,570  35 

Horses 7,345  00 

Furniture  and  fixtures 910  57 

35,507  31 

Loss  items: 

Horses  by  death $3,505  00 

Horses  by  sale 825  00 

1914  sundries 522  34 

4,853  34 


Grand  total $960,180  5'6 

Net  income $76,15384 

Other  income: 

Dividends,  Dairymen's  Mfg.  Co 243  00 

Hauling  National  Milk  Sugar  Co 49  05 

292  05 


Net  profit $76,44589 

Dividends,  preferred  stock,  7  per  cent. .     $17,50000 
Dividends,  common  stock,  8  per  cent. . .  .       15,316  00 

$32,816  00 

Surplus,  January  1,  1915 ' 52,138  21 

Surplus,  December  31,  1915 95,768  10 

Total . .  .  $128 , 584  10      $128 , 584  10 


511 


512 

The  following  is  the  report  of  the  auditor  as  to  Clover  Farms, 
Inc. : 


REPORT 

TO 

JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 

ON 

PRODUCTION,  OPERATING  AND  DISTRIBUTING  COSTS  OF  MILK  — 
CLOVER  FARMS,  INC.,  534  WEST  48th  STREET,  NEW  YORK 
CITY,  JULY  1,  1915,  TO  JUNE  30,  1916 


[513] 


514 


PRODUCTION,  OPERATING  AND  DISTRIBUTING 
COSTS  OF  MILK 

December  4,  1910. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

GENTLEMEN. —  Agreeable  to  your  request  I  have  made  an  ex- 
amination of  the  books  of  account  of  the  Clover  Farms  Company, 
Inc.,  No.  534  48th  street,  New  York  city,  with  special  reference 
to  the  operating,  manufacturing  and  distributing  costs  of  milk 
for  the  period  of  July  1,  1915-June  30,  1916,  and  I  am  attach- 
ing hereto  report  and  remarks  in  connection  with  various  exhibits 
supporting  same. 

Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 

Certified  Public  Accountant. 


515 


REPORT 

December  4,  1916. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

GENTLEMEN. —  The  Clover  Farms  Company,  Inc.,  is  a  corpora- 
tion with  authorized  capital  stock  of  $250,000,  of  which  there 
was  outstanding  on  June  30,  1916,  $173,000. 

Aii  analysis  of  the  accounts  of  this  company  affords  a  most  excep- 
tional opportunity  of  showing  costs,  of  the  production  and  dis- 
tribution of  fluid  milk,  particularly  as  this  company  has  three 
different  avenues  of  distribution,  namely :  on  routes,  in  stores  and 
at  Board  of  Health  stations,  in  the  boroughs  of  Manhattan  and 
Brooklyn.  It  might  be  said  at  the  outset  that  this  latter  avenue 
of  distribution  affords  one  of  the  most  striking  instances  of  how 
economically  milk  can  be  distributed,  in  contrast  to  the  luxurious 
and  consequently  expensive  delivery  service  that  is  maintained 
by  milk  dealers  in  general  in  this  city. 

It  will  be  noted  that  this  company  spends  a  very  large  sum  for 
advertising  purposes,  and  in  addition,  particular  attention  is  called 
to  the  charges  to  cost  for  depreciation  made  during  the  last  fiscal 
year,  and  also  the  additional  charges  to  costs,  for  repairs  and  re- 
placements, both  of  which,  in  total,  amount  to  over  25  per  cent 
&f  the  book  value  of  the  assets  as  shown  on  July  1,  1915. 

Xo  particular  method  of  costs  has  been  adopted  in  connection 
with  their  records,  although  in  contrast  to  other  companies,  some 
effort  has  been  made  to  distribute  expenses,  first  against  products, 
and  subsequently  the  cost  of  said  product  to  the  various  avenues 
of  distribution. 

Sufficient  tests  were  made  in  the  examination  of  expenses 
charged  to  costs,  and  no  exception  can  be  reasonably  made  to  any 
of  them  except  as  hereinafter  noted. 


516 

EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Statement  referred  to  herewith  is  a  reconstructed  statement  of 
unit  costs,  after  deducting  an  erroneous  charge  to  costs  for  depre- 
ciation of  $6,273.77,  details  of  which  are  supported  in  Exhibit  No. 
3  hereinafter  referred  to.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  net  profit  on 
every  quart  of  milk  of  .0024  as  shown  on  Exhibit  ~No.  1,  referred  to, 
is  approximately  on  an  average  with  that  of  other  companies,  al- 
though a  more  scientific  charge  for  replacement  expenses,  repairs 
and  depreciation  as  aforesaid  would  undoubtedly  increase  this  unit 
cost  considerably.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  average  selling  price 
herewith  is  somewhat  lower  than  that  obtained  by  most  companies 
and  this  is  no  doubt  correct,  due  to  the  fact  that  a  great  part  of 
their  Grade  "A"  milk  is  sold  at  .08  per  quart.  The  administrative 
and  advertising  expenses  are  proportionately  high  and  your  at- 
tention is  called  to  the  details  of  same  in  Exhibit  No.  6. 

The  net  per  cent  of  profit  on  sales  of  3.14  per  cent  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  unit  profit  of  each  quart  of  milk,  somewhat  below 
average,  subject,  however,  to  the  qualifications  as  above  stated. 

EXHIBIT  No.  2 

An  analysis  of  costs,  based  on  the  books  of  account  of  the  com- 
pany, before  adjusted,  as  shown  in  Exhibit  1,  shows  a  net  profit 
of  .0021.  It  will  be  noted  in  analyzing  the  costs  that  there  is  a 
loss  of  very  nearly  four-tenths  of  a  cent  on  every  quart  of  milk 
sold  through  stores.  This  has  been  determined  by  apportioning 
the  total  quarts  of  milk  purchased,  in  proportion  as  the  amount 
of  sales  of  dairy  products  in  the  stores,  bears  to  the  combined 
sales  of  dairy  products  in  both  routes  and  stores,  and  also  by  charg- 
ing on  a  quantity  basis  a  proportion  of  the  cost  of  the  milk,  freight, 
country  expenses,  advertising  expenses,  administrative  expenses; 
in  addition  that  part  of  the  store  expenses  actually  chargeable  to 
the  sale  of  dairy  products  was  also  included  in  proportion  to  the 
store  sales. 

It  will  be  noted  that  this  unit  loss  in  stores  reduces  the  net  unit 
profit,  as  shown  by  the  routes  amounting  to  .00227  to  an  average 
unit  profit  of  .0021.  The  most  remarkable  item  of  costs  in  con- 
nection with  this  store  account  is  expenses  of  delivery  at  the  store, 


517 

which  equals  .0241,  over  one-half  a  cent  greater  than  the  delivery 
expenses  shown  on  the  routes. 

EXHIBIT  No.  3 

Particular  attention  is  called  to  the  additional  charges  of  costs 
for  repairs  and  replacements  included  in  the  above  exhibit,  which, 
in  view  of  the  charges  for  the  depreciation  made  or  in  view  of 
what  would  have  been  the  proper  depreciation  charges,  seem  in 
some  cases  to  be  very  high. 

As  stated  in  Exhibit  No.  1,  the  actual  profit  for  the  fiscal  year 
ending  June  30,  1916,  would  be  materially  increased  if  a  more  ac- 
curate method  of  charging  for  items  of  this  kind  was  maintained. 

In  allowing  for  the  arbitrary  adjustment  for  depreciation  of 
$24,277.22,  it  must  also  be  borne  in  mind  that  6  per  cent  is  allowed 
on  real  estate  and  buildings  amounting  to  $102,812.51,  a  good  part 
of  which,  no  doubt,  is  land  on  which  no  depreciation  charge  should 
be  made.  It  will  also  be  noted  that  the  most  conservative  estimate 
is  made  in  connection  with  depreciation  rates  on  other  items.  It 
will  also  be  noted. that  depreciation  is  allowed  on  the  increase  of 
assets  shown  herewith  during  the  year,  using  the  same  rate  of  de- 
preciation for  a  six  months'  period  which  in  itself  is  a  very  con- 
servative measure,  so  that  no  matter  from  what  angle  the  costs 
are  viewed,  it  becomes  very  evident  that  they  are  loaded  with 
depreciation  charges. 

EXHIBIT  No.  5 

A  combined  statement  of  sales  of  dairy  products  and  groceries 
in  the  stores  of  this  company  show  a  net  loss  of  $18,193.35,  after 
charging  to  the  stores  a  proportionate  share  of  the  administrative 
expenses  on  the  basis  of  the  sales  in  stores  to  total  sales,  and  also 
a  share  of  the  advertising  expenses  for  dairy  products,  on  the  basis 
of  sales  of  dairy  products  in  stores  to  the  total  sales  of  dairy  pro- 
ducts by  the  company. 

As  will  be  seen  from  the  loss  on  dairy  products  shown  in  Ex- 
hibit No.  2,  it  must  be  said  that  a  greater  percentage  of  loss  is  made 
on  the  groceries  than  on  the  dairy  products,  all  of  which  can  only 
be  attributed  to  the  small  turn-over  in  proportion  to  the  cost  of 
operation,  and  a  smaller  gross  trading  percentage  of  profit  on 


518 

groceries  than  on  dairy  products,  based  on  the  costs  for  dairy 
products  shown  by  this  company. 

It  might  be  said  that  in  some  stores  there  is  a  small  profit,  and 
if  further  information  is  desired  along  these  lines,  figures  can  be 
obtained  to  show  the  proportion  of  turn-over  to  expenses  incurred, 
necessary  to  show  said  profit. 

EXHIBIT  ISo.  6 

Statement  shown  herewith  shows  total  sales  of  $1,708,683.38 
and  a  net  profit  of  $23,689.21,  which  is  particularly  low,  but 
which  can  be  very  well  accounted  for  by  the  extraordinary  replace- 
ment and  depreciation  charges  as  referred  to  aforesaid,  and  the 
unusual  advertising  expenses  shown  herein. 

The  cost  of  real  estate  is  for  special  services  rendered  by  a  firm, 
Slawson  and  Hobbs,  real  estate  brokers,  for  which  the  company 
pays  $100  per  month.  They  also  pay  a  firm,  Pease  and  Elliman, 
$15.75  a  month. 

It  might  be  said  in  this  connection,  that  the  firm  of  Pease  and 
Elliman  is  said  to  serve  a  large  milk  company  operating  on  the 
East  Side,  and  it  is  recommended  to  this  committee  that  they 
subpoena  this  company  so  that  the  books  of  the  company  which 
they  serve  can  be  looked  into.  The  solicitors'  salaries  and  com- 
missions shown  herein  are  paid  ori  the  basis  of  from  .25  to  $1.00 
per  quart  for  every  customer  which  the  company  serves  for  thirty 
days. 

The  miscellaneous  charges  for  $3,158.05  are  for  postage  in  con- 
nection with  mailing  circulars,  etc.  The  item  of  general  expenses 
amounting  to  $37,661.45  has  been  examined  and  most  of  the  items 
contained  therein  are  for  ice  and  petty  expenses.  The  petty  cash 
was  examined  for  the  months  of  June  to  December  and  nothing 
of  an  exceptional  nature  was  noted  therein. 


A  particularly  interesting  statement  herewith  seems  to  confirm 
the  figures  shown  in  some  other  companies  that  the  cost  of  the  pro- 
duction is  lower  in  the  country  than  in  the  city.  In  this  company, 
however,  the  distribution  of  depreciation  and  replacement  expenses 
may  somewhat  cloud  the  actual  costs,  and  there  seems  to  be  con- 


519 

siderable  room  for  discussion  on  this  very  important  feature  of  the 
production  of  milk.  It  will  be  noted,  particularly,  that  the  labor 
in  the  country  is  between  25  and  30  per  cent  cheaper  than  in  the 
city,  which  in  itself  is  an  item  to  be  reckoned  with.  The  net  de- 
crease of  cost  in  the  country  amounts  to  over  .003  of  a  cent  and 
it  is  again  recommended  that  the  fullest  examination  of  witnesses 
be  made  to  get  all  the  information  possible  in  connection  with  this 
subject. 

EXHIBIT  No.  8 

The  balance  sheet  of  the  company  as  at  July  1,  1916,  shows  a 
net  surplus  of  $47,797.43  and  in  addition  dividends  declared  and 
unpaid  of  $20,772.00.  During  the  year  there  were  dividends  of 
5  pei1  cent,  3  per  cent,  9  per  cent,  of  which  only  the  5  per  cent 
was  paid  and  with  which  capital  stock  was  purchased  to  the 
amount  of  $8,100.00. 

The  notes  receivable  shown  on  current  assets  represent  mostly 
uncollectable  accounts  on  the  Greenfield  Dairy  Company,  control 
of  which  is  vested  in  the  Clover  Farms  Company,  Inc. 

Attention  is  again  called  to  the  fact  that  the  reserve  set  up  for 
depreciation  on  a  balance  of  the  sheet  of  the  company  as  at  July 
1,  1915,  was  approximately  $11,000,  while  the  reserve  shown  here- 
with a  year  later,  is  over  $35,000,  confirming  the  statements  shown 
aforesaid  that  extraordinary  charges  were  made  to  costs  for  the 
current  year. 

It  might  be  said  in  conclusion  that  this  company,  while  it  has 
made  additions  to  this  plant  during  the  year,  have  recently  dis- 
posed of  some  of  their  branches  in  the  borough  of  Brooklyn.  This 
is  merely  hearsay  and  is  simply  noted  for  whatever  benefit  the 
Committee  may  get  from  it. 


520 


EXHIBIT  No.  1 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 

Readjusted  Unit  Cost  Statement  of  Profit  and  Losses  on  Purchase  of  19,536,650 
Quarts  of  Milk  and  Sale  of  Same  Either  as  Milk,  Cream,  Butter,  etc.,  July  1, 
1915,  to  June  30,  1916 

Unit 
Amount         sale 

Sales.  $1,490,627  69    .0763 

Unit 
Amount         cost 

Cost  of  product $694,943  30   .0355 

Freight 134,896  84   .0069 

Country,  city  and  store  ex- 
pense as  per  sheet  No $525 ,591  54 

Less  overcharge .  .          6 , 273  77 

$519,317  77  .0266 

Advertising 29,275  04    .0015 

Administrative  expenses 65,454  85    .0034 

Total  cost $1,443,887  80  

Net  profit 46,739  89   .0024 


$1,490,627  69   .0763  $1,490,627  69   .0763 
Percent  of  profit  on  sales 3.14 


521 

EXHIBIT  No.  2 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 
Production  and  Delivery  Costs  of  Milk,  Fiscal  Year,  1915-1916 

TOTAL  —  ROUTES  ONLY 
Total  quantity,  quarts 19,536,650 

Sales  routes $1,478,732  89 

Less  miscellaneous  credits 277  26 

$1,478,455  63 

Creamery  sales $2,500  96 

Store  sales 51,102  58 

Cheese  sales 31,506  64 

85,110  18 

Total  sales....                                                                                  .  $1,563,565  81 
Creamery  bill  J.  V.  No.  157 112  00 


Total  sales $1,563,677  81 

Cream  purchased $68 , 248  09 

Cream  purchased,  miscl 80  00 

Condensed  milk  purchased..  2,233  76 

Cond.  milk  purchased,  miscl.  16  36 

Milk  purchased,  miscl 162  82 

$70,741  03 

31  per  cent  of  this  added 2,309  09 

Total  outside  purchases 73,050  12 

Total  sales .  $1,490,627  69 

Unit  cost .07629 

Cost  of  milk $694,943  30 

Unit  cost .0355 

Freight $134,896  84 

Unit  cost .0069 

Country  expense $162 , 234  02 

Unit  cost .0083 

City  expense $347,935  44 

Unit  cost .0177 

Part  of  store  expense $15 , 422  08 

Advertising  expense 29 , 275  04 

Administrative  expense 65 , 454  85 


Total  cost  and  expenses.  $1  450,161  57 
Unit  cost..  .07419 


Net  profit  and  loss $40,466  12 

Unit  net  profit  and  loss .  00211 

Total  quantity,  quarts 18,898, 180 

Sales  routes $1,478,732  89 

Less  miscellaneous  credits 277  26 

$1,478,455  63 

Creamery  sales $2 , 500  96 

Store  sales 

Cheese  sales 31,506  64 

34,007  60 


Total  sales $1,512,463  23 


522 

EXHIBIT  No.  2  (Continued) 

Creamery  bill  J.  V.  No.  157 112  00 

Total  sales $1,512,575  23 

Total  outside  purchases 70,662  76 

Total  sales $1,441,912  47 

Unit  cost..  .07629 


Cost  of  milk $672,231  85 

Unit  cost .0355 

Freight $130,411  23 

Unit  cost .0069 

Country  expense $156,932  40 

Unit  cost .0083 

City  expense $347,935  44 

Unit  cost .0184 

Part  of  store  expense 

Advertising  expense $28,318  30 

Administrative  expense 63 , 095  46 

Total  cost  and  expenses.  $1,398,924  68 

Unit  cost..  .07403 


Net  profit  and  loss $42,987  79 

Unit  net  profit  and  loss .00227 


STORES  —  DAILY  PRODUCTS 
Total  quantity,  quarts,  sales  routes,  less  miscellaneous  credits 638 , 470 

Creamery  sales,  store  and  cheese  sales $51 , 102  58 

Total  sales $51,102  58 

Total  outside  purchases $2,387  36 

Total  sales $48,715  22 

Unit  cost 07629 

Cost  of  milk..  .  $22,711  45 

Unit  cost 0355 

Freight $4,485  61 

Unit  cost .0070 

Country  expense $5,301  62 

Unit  cost .0083 

City  expense $15,422  08 

Unit  cost .0241 

Advertising  expense $956  74 

Administrative  expense 2,359  39 

Total  cost  and  expense $51 ,236  89 

Unit  total  cost  and  expense .07990 

Net  profit  and  loss  (loss) $2,521  67 

Unit  net  profit  and  loss 00395 


523 


EXHIBIT  No.  3 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 

Comparative  Statement  of  Depreciation  Charges  Properly  Chargeable  to  Costs  and 
Depreciation  Charges  Actually  Charged  to  Costs,  Fiscal  Year,  July  1  to  June 
30,  1916 


ADJUSTED  DEPRECIATED  CHARGES 


ASSETS 

Book  value 
July  1,  1915 

Depre- 
ciation 
rate. 
Per  cent 

Amount  of 
deprecia- 
tion 

Increase  in 
value  during 
1915-1916 

Deprecia- 
tion on 
increased 
value  for 
six  months 

Total 
deprecia- 
tion 

Heal  estate  and  build- 
ings 

$102,812  51 

6 

$6,168  75 

$27,164  49 

$814  93 

$6,983  68 

Furniture  and  fixtures  . 
Machinery  and  fixtures 
Horses 

11,071  98 
62,203  82 
41,400  00 

10 
10 
10 

1,107  20 
6,220  38 
4,140  00 

743  47 
18,311  27 
5,125  00 

37  68 
915  56 
256  25 

1,144  88 
7,135  94 
4,396  25 

Wagons  

30,365  00 

10 

3,036  50 

19,243  35 

962  16 

3,998  66 

Harness  . 

5,739  10 

10 

573  91 

878  20 

43  90 

617  81 

$253  592  41 

$21,246  74 

$3,030  48 

$24,277  22 

Manufacturing  and  country  depreciation  charges. 
City  depreciation  charge 


Charges  for 
depreciation  in- 
cluded in  costs 

$18,330  48 
12,220  51 

$30,550  99 


Replacements  —  country    

Machinery  and  fixtures  —  country 

Harness  and  wagons 

Repairs  to  harness  and  wagons  —  city 
Auto  expense   


Total 

Bottle  replacement 


Additional  charges 

to  cost  for  repairs 

and  replacements 

$19,577  72 
4,431  54 
1,183  03 
6,921  42 
1,568  37 


$33,682  08 
$33,965  18 


524 


i  I 


h-l 

5 

M 
pq 


GO  b-  i— '  CO  CO  b-  CO 
!>•  CO  O5  !>•        OS  CO 

00  Ci  rH  CO          00  CO 


CO  i—  i  O 

CO  rH  !>. 

-^H  00  CO 


o 

(M 


^  ^  O  00  CO  CO 

co  co  co  oo  ^^  05 

•*f  O  CO  rH  O  Oi 

oo    •  0^  co  t^- 1^- 

!>•  CO  CO  CO  »O 

T-T  co"«f 


§c^ 


OiO 


§32 

i—  I  CO 

oo  oo 

§^g^g2 

05 

Y—  < 

CO»OT-I 

Tt<  O 

l—  1  00 

^00 

l>-    • 

l-H 

co" 

a«" 

cT 

s 

€^ 

525 

EXHIBIT  No.  5 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 
Profit  and  Loss  Statement  of  Store  Sales,  Fiscal  Year,  1915-1916 

Total  dairy  sales $51 , 102  58 

Total  grocery  sales 144,840  31 

$195,942  89 

Cost  of  dairy  products $33,639  19 

Cost  of  groceries $113,052  15 

Less  credits .  .  753  43 


Net  cost  of  groceries 112,298  72 

Total  cost  of  product $145,937  91 

Gross  trading  profit $50,004  98 

Rents $21 ,762  70 

Less  rentals 5, 516  00 

Net  rent  of  stores $16,216  70 

Wages 23,208  18 

General  expense 18,954  69 

$58,379  57 
Credits..  17788 


$58,201  69 

Administrative  expenses: 

Dairy  products $2,359  39 

Groceries 6,680  51 

Advertising  expenses: 

Dairy  products 956  74 

Net  loss  on  stores . . ,  $18 . 193  35 


$68,198  33   $68,198  33 


526 


EXHIBIT  No.  6 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 

Detailed  Profit  and  Loss  Account,  Fiscal  Year  July  1,  1915,  to  June  30,  1916 

Route  sales $1,478,732  89 

Store  sales 195,942  89 

Creamery  sales 2,500  96 

Cheese  sales 31,506  64 

Total  sales .  $1,708,683  38 

Milk  purchases $694,943  30 

Cream  purchases 68,248  09 

Condensed  milk  purchases 2,233  76 

Grocery  purchases Ill ,  113  68 

$876,538  83 
Less  increase  in  cheese  inventory 6,358  25 

Net  cost  of  purchases  sold $870, 180  58 

Gross  trading  profit $838,502  80 

Freight $134,896  84 

Manufacturing  and  country  expenses: 

Labor $79,414  88 

Stable 11,382  47 

Light  and  power 1 ,968  28 

Fuel 9,041  26 

Ice -. 4,533  90 

Replacements 19,577  72 

Machinery  and  fixtures 4,431  54 

Harness  and  wagons 1 , 183  03 

Water 2, 100  00 

Depreciation 18,330  48 

Miscellaneous  expense 12,820  12 

Insurance 1 ,429  89 

Sundry  charges,  milk,  cream  and 

condensed  milk 259  18 

Cheese  expenses 4, 166  32 

$170,639  07 
Less  interest  charges 4 , 276  88 


Net  manufacturing  expense $166 . 362  19 

General  delivery  and  citv  expenses: 

Wages 181,836  62 

Stable  charges 54,600  06 

B  ottle  replacement 33,965  18 

Depreciation 12,220  51 

Repairs  to  harness  and  wagons.  .  .  6,921  42 

Insurance 5,739  87 

Miscellaneous  charges 277  26 

Interest  on  drivers'  securities 894  98 

Automobile  expense 1 ,568  37 

Loss  on  shorts 20392 

Discounts  on  sales 7 .074  52 

General  expense 37,661  45 

Bad  debts  charged  off 8 ,052  51 

Grocery  warehouse 1 ,938  47 

$352,955  14 

Less  interest  charge 4,276  87 


52T 


EXHIBIT  No.  6  (Continued) 

Net  general  delivery  and  city  expense $348 , 678  27 

Building  maintenance 4,710  48 

Advertising: 

Solicitors'  salaries $12 , 482  75 

Commissions 2 , 506  90 

Newspaper  advertisements 2, 179  11 

Billboard  advertisements 1 ,780  56 

Circulars 3,543  61 

Real  estate  information 1 ,251  00 

Miscellaneous 3,158  05 

Street  car  advertisements 2,985  06 


Total  advertising 29,887  04 

Store  expense: 

Rents $16,216  70 

Wages 23,208  18 

Expenses 18,954  69 

Total  store  expenses 58,379  57 

Administrative  expenses: 

Officers'  salaries $19 ,806  48 

Employees'  salaries 22,005  15 

Stationery  and  printing 4,576  06 

General  expenses 12,832  21 

Legal  expenses 3 , 330  23 

Traveling  expenses 2,248  24 

Interest  on  loans 3,424  46 

Interest  on  mortgages 1 , 394  98 

Taxes 1,988  00 

Rent 181  39 

Sundries. .  112  00 


Total  administrative  expenses 71,899  20 

Total  freight  and  expenses $814,813  59 

Net  profit 23,689  21 


$838,502  80      $838,502  80 


528 


M 


d 

6  & 


OQ 


II 


SSoo 


I>OOCO 

S3£ 


lii 


OOlOIN 


S3 


O<N 

•*CO 

cToo 


i2 


s 


111 


5*2 


529 


EXHIBIT  No.  8 

CLOVER  FARMS,  INC. 

General   Balance  Sheet,   Clover  Farms  Inc.,  Fiscal   Year    1915-1916 

Assets 
Fixed  assets: 

Cans,  boxes  and  bottles $38,597  32 

Furniture  and  fixtures 11 ,815  45 

Harness 6,617  30 

Horses 43,525  00 

Ice 4,301  99 

Machinery  and  fixtures 80,515  09 

Real  estate  and  buildings 129 , 977  00 

Supplies 9,443  68 

Tools 2,996  59 

Wagons  and  autos 49,608  35 

Wagon  shop  material 2,224  65 

Can  material .  .  156  77 


Total $382,779119 

Special  assets : 

Improvements $828  50 

Investments 1 , 176  75 

Shokomeko  ice  pond 213  61 

Total.. 2,218  86 

Working  and  trading  assets: 

Butter $10  80 

Buttermilk 113  96 

Cheese 11,201  45 

Condensed  milk 13  43 

Cream 1,368  54 

Groceries 5,775  36 

Milk 2,547  49 

Stores 9, 272  64 


Total 30,303  67 

Current  assets : 

Accounts  receivable,  routes $66 , 478  45 

Accounts  receivable,  stores 12,097  25 

Cash  in  bank 3,315  54 

Cash  on  hand 1 ,295  00 

Notes  receivable 33,390  11 


Total 116,576135 

Personal  and  others: 

Check  return $263  19 

Insurance  fund 3,055  80 

G.  A.  Twele. .  100  00 


Total 3,418  99 

Deferred  charges  to  expense: 

Advanced  freight $697  58 

Dairy  inspection 266  65 

Prepaid  insurance 4,416  95 

Total 5,381  18 

Total  assets . .  $540 , 678  24 


530 

EXHIBIT  ~No.  8  (Continued) 

Liabilities 

Capital  stock  authorized $250,000  00 

Capital  stock  issued 76 , 900  00 

Total,  capital  stock  issued $173, 100  00 

First  mortgages 26,700  00 

Notes  payable  drivers 22 , 100  00 

Current  liabilities : 

Accounts  payable $108 , 120  18 

Drivers'  securities 1 ,468  81 

Notes  payable 99,208  76 

Total 208,797  75 

Reserves  for: 

Depreciation  furniture  and  fixtures $1 , 625  57 

Depreciation  H.  W.  H.  and  autos 12,517  40 

Depreciation,  machinery  and  fixtures 12,095  49 

Depreciation,  real  estate  and  buildings ....  9 , 329  93 

Depreciation,  tools 275  43 


Total 35,844  82 

Personal  and  others: 

Clover  Farms,  Inc $103  13 

Officers'  salaries. . .  864  91 


Total 968  04 

Accruals : 

Interest  on  drivers'  securities $242  95 

Wages 3,564  41 

Water..  79084 


Total 4,598  20 

Dividends  declared 20 , 772  00 

Surplus,  June  30,  1916 47,797  43 

Total  liabilities $540 , 678  24 


The  Mutual  McDermott  Dairy  Corporation  had  not  been  in 
operation  a  full  year  at  the  time  of  the  audit  of  its  books  and  only 
certain  features  of  its  operation  thought  to  be  of  value  for  com- 
parative purposes  in  ascertaining  the  production  costs  were  in- 
cluded in  the  report. 


REPORT 

TO 

JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 

ON 

PRODUCTION  COSTS  or  MILK  —  MUTUAL-MCDERMOTT  DAIRY 
CORPORATION,  214  EAST  22nd  STREET,  NEW  YORK  CITY,  FOR 
THE  FISCAL  PERIOD  MAY  1  —  AUGUST  31,  1916 


[531] 


533 


PRODUCTION  COSTS  OF  MILK 


December,  15,  1916. 

Joint  Legislative  Committee  on  Dairy  Products,  Live  Stock  and 
Poultry: 

GENTLEMEN. —  Agreeable  to  your  request  I  have  made  an  ex- 
amination of  some  of  the  books  of  account  of  the  Mutual-McDer- 
mott  Dairy  Corporation,  with  special  reference  to  production  costs, 
and  I  am  attaching  hereto  statements  supporting  same. 

Yours  very  truly, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 

Certified  Public  Accountant. 


534 


REPORT 


The  Mutual-McDermott  Dairy  Corporation  is  a  company  with 
outstanding  capital  stock  at  the  present  time  as  follows:  Common 
stock,  $396,302.13;  preferred  stock,  $207,500. 

This  company  is  a  consolidation  of  the  Mutual  Milk  and  Cream 
Company  and  the  McDermott  Dairy  Company,  and  conducts  a 
general  business  in  the  production  and  distribution  of  milk  and 
cream,  both  wholesale  and  retail. 

The  company  has  been  organized  since  February,  1916,  and 
because  of  the  unsatisfactory  condition  of  their  books  for  the  first 
few  months  subsequent  to  their  organization,  it  has  been  deemed 
advisable,  in  view  of  the  limited  time  at  my  command,  to  select 
a  period  for  analysis  whereby  the  figures  are  more  reliable.  For 
this  particular  examination  the  months  of  May,  June,  July  and 
August,  1916,  were  selected,  and  details  are  set  forth  hereinafter. 

EXHIBIT  ISfo.  1 

The  statement  hereto  attached  showing  the  purchase  and  cost 
of  production  at  country  stations  has  been  compiled  after  con- 
siderable search  and  compilation  of  detailed  records  for  the  four 
months,  May,  June,  July  and  August,  1916,  during  which  months, 
as  is  well  known,  the  prices  for  milk  are  considerably  lower  than 
the  winter  months. 

Particular  attention  is  called  to  the  unit  costs  of  milk  and  the 
expenses  at  country  stations  for  this  period.  It  is  evident  that  an 
improper  distribution  has  been  made  when  it  is  noted  that  in  some 
cases,  stations  where  milk  is  pasteurized  there  is  a  smaller  unit 
cost  than  at  stations  where  there  is  no  pasteurization.  It  will 
also  be  noted  that  the  unit  cost  per  quart  of  milk  is  considerably 
lower  than  the  average  cost  as  shown  in  other  statements  for  milk 
purchased.  The  cost  of  the  functional  operations,  it  will  be  noted, 


535 

has  not  been  determined  as  has  been  shown  in  other  reports, 
and  no  comparison  can  be  made  with  other  companies  along  these 
lines,  nor  can  a  comparison  be  made  owing  to  the  fact  that  a  short 
period  of  the  year  is  taken. 

EXHIBIT  No.  2 

The  statement  herewith  shows  a  distribution  of  expenses  for 
each  of  the  branches  of  this  corporation,  analyzed  from  their  rec- 
ords for  the  period  herein  mentioned.  It  might  be  said  at  this 
time  that  the  wholesale  sales  contribute  a  very  fair  percentage  of 
the  total  turnover  of  the  business. 

The  sales  shown  here  are,  of  course,  for  milk  and  milk  products 
only,  as  compared  with  the  sales  shown  in  Exhibit  No.  3,  which 
include  sales  of  merchandise  through  stores.  The  average  cost 
per  route  is  particularly  low,  and  the  percentage  of  delivery  costs 
to  sales,  it  will  be  noted,  varies  considerably  between  the  different 
branches,  the  22nd  street  branch,  showing  the  smaller  per  cent,  of 
delivery  costs  to  sales,  represents  a  very  much  larger  per  cent,  of 
wholesale  sales  than  retail  sales,  while  the  Bronx  branch  repre- 
sents a.  very  much  larger  per  cent  of  retail  than  wholesale  sales. 

These  are  particularly  interesting  figures,  it  would  seem,  and 
your  attention  to  a  study  of  same  is  hereby  recommended. 

EXHIBIT  No.  3 

The  profit  and  loss  statement  shown  herewith  is  a  combined 
statement  of  monthly  statements  offered  by  this  company.  The 
sales,  as  noted  above,  include  sales  of  sundry  products  at  their 
stores.  The  incompleteness  of  their  records  due  to  the  present 
imperfect  system  of  accounts,  which  the  company  is  endeavoring 
to  remedy  as  rapidly  as  possible,  makes  the  figures  somewhat 
cloudy,  but  the  general  turnover  and  expenses  seem  to  be  fairly 
represented. 

EXHIBIT  No.  4 

The  balance  sheet  herewith  is  at  the  end  of  August  and  the  end 
of  the  period  shoAvn  in  previous  statements  and  is  simply  shown 
for  whatever  reference  or  information  the  Committee  may  obtain 
from  it. 


536 


Period  May  1  to  A 


TI 
cal 


Cost  of  P 


ood 


i-r- 

CO  <O  r-l  00  O5  CO 
W5  T-i  (M  CO  O  >-l 


r-l  COi-<  i-( 


T-i»C< 


S-" 


!COC^tN»t>»r— it^OOOC^OOr^OCOC^C 


•-ZZ-Z  :     :  :        :     :§  :  :  -     :«  :&»      :S  :& 

-^    =  o     G       -^    '--ft       -^    «i    H 


537 


co<NMt--fob^ii-i« 
booooobb< 


|  fH  CO  CO  Tj<  t-l  1-1  C 


?§o 


oooooo 


§§§§§§! 


O5^00O5O5CJ-*^OOfO(Nt»-*00>O^COiOOO(NO< 
CMCSlJOiM(MCOCJ(MCOC^MC4CJ!MCo54CslCCC*gCO< 


Tt<I>WCC^O'MOiOiMt^t>OOrH-^«OCOOOiOt»C«>'OOS»Oi003CD 
,-l,-l  COrH^I05T}(r-(         CO  i-l  M  rH  iH  N  i-t         FH^Hi-lrH^I^(Tj(^-lr-l 


"S 


o 
O 


o 

ft 

H 

5 

M 

R 
w 


oo  e!j  co  So ; 


^^H5^f:! 


538 


^ 

p 

it 

o  ^ 
01    O  I 

£     %j 
H    ?    I 

M       fe     I 

PQ      o  | 

— •          P5     § 
HH        H     P, 

M          ?r§ 

W    s^ 


1 
I 

I 

O 


>T*<lOt^lOO         CNrHrH'*  O  CO  O5  (N  CO 

)  rH  t»  >O  rH  ^         rH  O  rH  t-  W  O5  O  »O  00 

w^oWSSSSkS    t^SSS  ^w^qeo^oxNtNo    <N 

CO  CO  O  O5  CO  •<*<  "5  Tt<  •*       <NCO»Ol-  COI--00 

t»  CO  CM  CO  rH  rH  cb"lO  COCO  COCOrHOCOOit^OO^rH         00 

Q&  rH  C^ 

"   ~!§8§§8     fe^^  «     SOCOQO^^O,         ^     rno 

^iO»-Ht>T^        T^OOC^  rH        (NrhOCCCD 

o  o  w  t^ocococsco 

co" 

« 1C  CO  T}<  CO  r}<  m       lOOW  CM  COOOOCOTjt  OOCM  OO 

<0<NTJ<COCO(M       t^<NrH  <N"5.=Jo>rHCOOCDOa>        CO 

lOOoScOCOCO       OO5O5  OO^ScoSo2§^cO        1C 

co"  IN"    oo   " 

5 

W  ^  »O  COOOCO-^MrHTj< 

O  CD  t>-  CD  Tt<  00  O  CX  O       O»OCOt>«  rHCD  O^CO  OOOCO>O 

O  O  CO  00  00  CO  Tf  M  CO       03100*0  rH  t»  00  CO  O3  •*  CO  O  IN 

§0>050003rHO^         =5t!09  t' 00  IN  CO  »0  Tt*  rH  CO  CO 

00  CO  rH  -*f  CM  rH  OO  00         b*  *O  CO  *O  O5  Ov|  t^"  rH  Ci  b»  Is*  rH  Oi 

CO  TjT  CO  10"  ^"      (N"^l"^5"c<r<N"^rH 

«*  <N 

>COCTl  rH  OJ  CO  O  »0  00  CO  CO  rH 

>r^>O  !>CO^iOOO>C.t^OrH 

KNrH  r(<  t~  CO  00  rH  CM  Tt<  rH  C< 

CN  •*        t»rH  ^  •<*!  as  IM  cs  co  w  t>Te<i         d 

I    I 


££  -,§  .     :    S 

mltf^" 


1I2SI?; 


Ill 

J3^  OQ 

*     «3  WrH.-H     a, 

•2"c4  ..B'g'S  oag 

>el  ^    rniT/-^/-N    CT-N- 


,l\\ 

g  r°  I 

11  H 


539 


O5  CO<D 

o  t^  o 
<N     cc 


U1  Ol  00       CO  OC  <M 
W  «C  t^      t^  ^  Is- 

U   "      2S 


§ 


>t~-t^ 

ioC^H 


'•3 


:£? 

ll 


l 

H-<H^ 


l 


540 


541 


•-H          rl          CO 


rt  •<*<         (M  CO  1M 


ss 


8       ^" 


1 


542 


8 


543 

The  accountant  has  also  prepared  a  report  embodying  certain 
statistics  which  are  of  considerable  value  upon  these  questions. 
In  Exhibit  No.  1  in  the  following  report  is  contained  a  table  made 
from  the  records  of  the  milk  companies  showing  the  average 
prices  paid  for  milk  by  the  New  York  dealers  for  each  month  of 
the  several  years  from  1902  to  1916,  inclusive.  Exhibit  No.  2  in 
connection  therewith  shows  the  amount  of  milk  received  by  the 
metropolitan  district  for  each  month  of  said  years  as  fluid  milk, 
while  Exhibit  No.  3  shows  the  addition  of  cream  and  condensed 
milk  reduced  to  fluid  milk  quantities  with  various  statistics  in  con- 
nection therewith.  This  report  also  shows  in  its  various  exhibits 
the  sources  of  supply  of  the  milk  in  question. 

The  Committee  has  gathered  throughout  the  State  a  great  num- 
ber of  exhibits  in  relation  to  the  amount,  prices  paid,  cost  of  manu- 
facturing at  cheese  and  butter  factories  of  all  kinds.  These  ex- 
hibits are  tabulated  in  large  part  and  a  great  deal  of  the  interest- 
ing information  contained  in  them  is  shown  in  Exhibits  Nos.  5  and 
6.  Perhaps  the  most  interesting  exhibit  in  connection  with  the  gen- 
eral report  of  the  accountant  is  Exhibit  No.  12,  which  follows.  The 
milk  distributors  have  long  claimed  that  the  months  of  October, 
November,  December  and  January,  because  of  the  comparatively 
high  prices  paid  both  for  milk,  resulted  in  a  net  loss  in  the  dis- 
tribution thereof  and  that  the  profits  made  from  the  business  were 
necessarily  made  during  the  months  from  February  to  August, 
inclusive.  It  is  not  going  too  far  to  state  that  this  claim  on  the 
part  of  the  distributors  has  been  disputed  by  a  great  many 
persons.  The  accountant  employed  by  the  Committee  examined 
into  that  question  fully  and  the  result  of  that  examination  is  shown 
in  detail  by  Exhibit  No.  12  of  the  report  which  follows.  From  this 
exhibit  it  would  appear  that  the  claims  of  the  distributors  have 
been  well  founded.  This  table  is  made  up  from  the  records  of 
companies  whose  detailed  audit  precedes  in  this  report.  From 
this,  it  would  appear  that  on  every  quart  of  milk  sold  by  these 
companies  during  the  period  from  September,  1915,  to  February, 
1916,  there  was  a  loss  of  at  least  .0001  per  quart,  amounting  to  as 
much  as  .0039  for  the  month  of  November,  1915.  Of  course  the 


544 


losses  for  these  months  actually  were  in  these  companies  compen- 
sated for  by  the  profits  from  February  to  August,  inclusive,  whiek 
increased  from  a  net  profit  of  .0006  in  the  month  of  February, 
191G,  to  a  profit  of  .0135  for  the  months  of  May  and  June,  1910. 


MILK    COSTS 

A   BRIEF   SUMMARY   or   THE   EXAMINATION   OF   VARIOUS  MILK 
CONCERNS  AND  A  STUDY  OF  OTHER  REPORTS 

FOR  THE 

JOINT  LEGISLATIVE  COMMITTEE  ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS, 
LIVE  STOCK  AND  POULTRY 

BY 

I-TKRBERT  B.  HAWKINS,  C.  P.  A. 


(545) 


18 


54' 


MILK  COSTS 

February  1,  1917. 

Attached  hereto  you  \\ill  find  a  very  brief  summary  of  some 
studies  and  analysis  in  connection  with  my  work  for  you. 

The  figures  shown  in  Exhibits  ~No.  2,  No.  3  and  "No.  4  were 
constructed  in  part  from  the  files  of  The  Milk  Reporter  by  cour- 
tesy of  Mr.  John  J.  Stanton,  and  due  credit  is  acknowledged  here- 
with, and  the  information  in  connection  with  the  history  of  freight 
on  milk  prior  to  1902  was  also  obtained  from  the  same  source. 

This  summary  is  not  as  complete  as  additional  time  and  study 
could  make  it,  but  it  is  hoped  that  it  will  serve  its  purpose. 
Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 

Certified  Public  Accountant 


548 

BEPOKT  ON  MILK  COSTS 

Any  treatise  on  the  subject  of  the  costs  of  milk,  must  neces- 
sarily fall  short  of  a  complete  study  if  it  does  not  include  a  study 
of  the  cost  of  production. 

Any  complete  determination  of  what  the  market  value  of  milk 
should  be  for  any  purpose,  aside  from  the  value  that  may  be  de- 
termined by  supply  and  demand,  also  falls  short  if  the  cost  of 
producing  the  article  can  not  be  determined. 

While  the  figures  herein  contained  are  not  offered  as  a  com- 
plete answer  to  even  the  second  part  of  the  story  of  milk  costs, 
it  may  go  a  long  way  toward  dispelling,  the  ever  too  willing  popu- 
lar belief  in  the  fabulous  profits  and  the  accumulation  of  untold 
wealth  in  the  hands  of  the  milk  distributors. 

No  subject  of  costs  is  as  susceptible  of  such  fine  analysis  as 
that  which  deals  with  the  handling,  transportation  and  distribut- 
ing of  milk,  but  with  the  information  that  has  been  gathered, 
part  of  which  is  included  herewith,  a  new  light  may  shine  on  what 
has  heretofore  been  a -very  much  misunderstood  subject. 

Gosr  OF  RAW  FLUID 

The  subject  of  costs  treated  herein,  therefore,  treats  only  of  that 
pertaining  to  the  purchase  of  the  product  from  the  producer,  the 
handling,  transporting,  manufacturing  and  delivery.  The  initial 
step,  naturally,  is  the-'  purchase  of  the  milk.  Thirty  years  ago  the 
popular  idea-  of  milk  was  that  which  was  brought  to  the  consumer 
—  if  not  from  within  the  city  limits  —  at  least  from  a  very  short 
distance  out  of  it.  The  subject  of  grading,  sanitary  handling,  or 
any  of  the  vexatious  problems  that  have  increased  with  the  in- 
creased consumption,  and  the  longer  distance  which  the  milk  has 
had  to  be  transported,  were  never  thought  of  in  those  days.  Per- 
haps it  can  be  well  said  that  not  until  the  introduction  of  the 
milk  bottle  as  a  means  of  conveying  the  product  to  the  consumer, 
together  with  health  regulation  and  pasteurization,  has  milk  be- 
come a  popular  article  of  food.  The  increased  consumption  of 
milk  in  the  greater  city  of  New  York  in  the  past  fifteen  years 
amounts  to  such  a  staggering  total  that  those  unversed  in  the 
statistics  and  history  of  milk  distribution  will  plainly  wonder  at 
the  figures. 


549 

In  1902  there  were  10,197,387  forty  quart  cans  of  milk 
«oining  into  the  greater  city.  In  1916  there  were  19,35272,28 
forty  quart  cans  of  milk  or  an  increase  of  89.7  per  cent. 

This  increase  has  been  gradual  each  year  with  the  exception,  of 
the  year  1908  when  there  was  a  decrease  of  .3  per  cent  under 
1907.  With  this  increase  in  consumption  has  come  a  gradual 
increase  in  cost  of  handling  in  every  channel  through  which,  milk 
has  to  come.  Statistics  that  can  be  fairly  well  relied  on  have  been 
procured,  as  shown  in  Exhibit  No.  1,  showing,  prices  paid  for 
raw  milk  to  be  used  for  market  milk  purposes, —  they  show  an 
average  increase  in  price  by  months  for  the  fifteen  years  of  40.6 
per  cent,  with  a  high  percentage  of  increase  of  57.3  per  cent  for 
the  month  of  October,  and  a  low  percentage  of  increase  of  20,8 
per  cent  for  the  month  of  February.  This  high  increase  for  the 
month  of  October  is  due  of  course  particularly  to.  the  recent  rise 
to  the  farmer,  in  'October  of  1916.  In  this  connection  it  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  notwithstanding  this  increase  per  unit  quart 
to  the  farmer,  the  average  daily  yield,  per  day  in  dairies  of  the 
Eastern  States  has  decreased  fifty  pounds,  as,  per.  Exhibit  !No.  8. 
This  fifty  pounds,  of  course,  is  based  on  the  decrease  shown  be- 
tween 1902  and  1915,  and  plainly  represents  a  decrease  in  the 
number  of  cows  per  dairy. 

CREAMERY  STATIONS 

The  New  York  Board  of  Health  regulations  necessitates  the 
utmost  sanitary  conditions  to  prevail  in  connection,  with  the  proper 
handling  at  the  source  of  supply,  and  it  can  be  well  said!  that  some 
of  the  country  buildings  of  milk  distributors  in  this,  part  of  our 
country  are  monuments  to  the.  genius  and  forethought  of  pioneers 
in  the  milk  business,  erected  in  order  to  produce  a  safe  and  sani- 
tary article  of  food. 

Detail  studies  of  the  cost  of  handling  milk  at  country  stations 
vary  with  the  way  the  product  is  finally  disposed  of  at  the  rail- 
road station.  Some  stations  at  which  pasteurization  is,  completed 
show  handling  costs  averaging  from  .00321  per  quart  to  .0064  per 
quart,  while  stations  at  which  the  milk  is  simply  received  and 
iced  and  shipped  in  cans  show  a  cost  of  .0024  to  .0035  per  quart. 


550 

FREIGHT 

The  history  of  hauling  milk  from  the  country  by  freight  to  the 
city  consumer  goes  back  perhaps  to  1842,  at  which  time  the  freight 
on  the  Erie  railroad  was  one-half  cent  a  quart.  In  1857  this  was 
increased  to  one  cent  a  quart,  and  in  1862-3  to  five  and  one-half 
cents  a  gallon  for  milk,  and  six  cents  a  gallon  for  cream,  at  which 
date  the  Harlem  railroad  also  became  interested  in  the  transpor- 
tation of  milk.  These  rates  were  for  milk  delivered  on  the  west 
shore  of  the  Hudson  and  for  milk  delivered  on  the  east  shore  the 
rates  were  one-half  cent  a  gallon  extra.  In  1879  the  New  Haven, 
the  New  Jersey,  the  Hudson  Elver  and  the  D.  L.  &  W.  were  all 
bringing  milk  into  the  New  York  market  and  charging  the  same 
rate  as  the  Erie  and  Harlem.  At  this  period  the  contention  was 
raised  that  the  price  was  exorbitant  and  the  matter  was  about  to 
be  looked  into  by  the  Legislature  of  New  York,  and  in  order  to 
frustrate  any  such  action  the  railroads  reduced  the  rate,  volun- 
tarily, to  one  cent  a  quart  on  May  1st,  1879.  On  January  1, 

1884,  this  rate  was  reduced  to  twenty-seven  and  one-half  cents  per 
40  quart  can  of  milk  and  45  cents  for  cream.     On  January  27, 

1885,  the  rate  was  again  increased  to  35  cents  for  a  40-quart  can 
of  milk,  the  cream  remaining  the  same.     On  January  15,  1890, 
the  rate  for  milk  was  reduced  to  32  cents  and  cream  42  cents  per 
40-quart  can,  and  on  April  1,  1892,  cream  was  increased  to  50 
cents,  the  milk  remaining  at  32  cents  as  above.     The  rates  for  40- 

7  O 

quart  cans  up  to  May  14,  1897,  were  also  applicable  to  the  trans- 
portation of  milk  in  bottles,  and  regardless  of  the  point  of  ship- 
ment, so  that  up  to  May  15,  1897,  the  gradual  reaching  out  into 
the  country  had  produced  a  condition  where  the  milk  was  coming 
from  points  200  miles  away,  and  on  that  date  the  following 
schedule  was  adopted,  the  rates  differing  for  cans  and  bottles  ac- 
cording to  the  zone  as  shown. 

These  rates  were  further  varied  as  between  carload  and  less 
than  carload  lots  (as  per  Exhibit  No.  9  showing  statement  of  in- 
crease in  freight  rates  since  August  1,  1902,  to  date).  The  in- 
crease determined  by  these  rates  for  can  milk  in  carload  lots  has 
been  approximately  15  per  cent  in  the  last  fifteen  years.  In  less 
than  carload  lots  the  increase  has  been  less  than  5  per  cent.  In 


551 

quart  bottles,  per  40  quarts,  the  increase  has  varied  from  15  per 
cent  in  the  first  zone  to  nearly  29  per  cent  in  the  fourth  zone,  and 
quart  bottles  in  less  than  carload  lots  have  shown  an  increase  vary- 
ing from  9  to  17 1/2  per  cent. 

PASTEURIZATION 

The  theory  of  pasteurization  of  milk  has  been  so  thoroughly  and 
completely  accepted  as  the  only  logical  solution  to  the  problem  of 
supplying  the  city  consumer  with  a  healthful,  clean  milk,  that  the 
cost  of  this  process  has  naturally  been  an  added  expense  in  the 
handling  of  it.  In  1911  the  Board  of  Health  of  New  York  city 
demanded  that  all  milk  sold  in  the  city  of  New  York  except  that 
produced  on  certified  farms,  should  be  pasteurized.  The  tremen- 
dous investment  necessitating  a  change  of  this  kind  drove  hundreds 
of  small  dealers  out  of  business  and  has  given  growth  to  large  con- 
cerns with  sufficient  capital  to  maintain  adequate  plants  to  serve 
the  public  in  conformity  with  the  regulations  as  laid  down  by  the 
Board  of  Health.  As  stated  above,  pasteurization  is  conducted  at 
the  country  stations  and  in  the  city.  In  reports  already  submitted 
to  this  Committee  it  would  seem  to  indicate  that  the  cost  of  con- 
ducting this  process  could  be  completed  at  a  lower  expense  in  the 
country  than  the  city.  Notwithstanding  the  contention  of  the 
large  distributors  who  are  more  anxious  to  maintain  larger  plants 
in  the  city  to  take  care  of  the  collection  of  milk  from  many  sta- 
tions, the  figures  as  shown  to  this  Committee  prove  almost  beyond 
a  doubt  that  there  are  certain  economies  that  can  be  effected  by  pas- 
teurization in  the  country  if  there  is  a  constant  supply  at  any  sta- 
tion to  keep  the  plant  working.  Figures  including  the  cost  of  milk 
in  bottles  show  varying  costs  in  the  country  for  a  year  of  .0428  to 
.0516  and  in  the  city  of  .0494  to  .0554  per  quart. 

DELIVERY 

The  problem  of  actually  getting  the  milk  to  the  consumer  is  one, 
the  solving  of  which  has  been  a  source  of  discussion  for  many 
years.  It  can  be  safely  said  at  this  time,  however,  that  no  product 
of  the  farm  is  more  economically  handled  in  distribution  to  the 
city  consumer,  than  the  quart  of  milk  to  be  had  every  morning  at 
his  door  step.  The  consumer's  attitude  undoubtedly  can  be  summed 


552 

up. in  these  words  "demand  i'or  service/'  and  until  some  hitherto 
unknown- means  of  distribution  can  be  discovered  the  largest  single 
cost  of  the  price  of  a  quart  of  milk  outside  of  the  fluid  itself  will 
remain.  It  can,  incidentally,  safely  be  said  that  even  a  reduction 
of  a  ten  cent  bottle  of  milk  to  eight  cents,  if  purchased  at  a  store 
would  tempt  but  a  very  small  percentage  of  housekeepers. 

Whatever  increasing  costs  of  delivery  that  can  be  shown  are 
partly  determined  by  the  increased  cost  of  wages  to  drivers  of  milk 
wagons.  In  .1902 -the  average  driver  made  about  -$15.00  a  week, 
in  1907,  ,$18.00  a  week,  and  in  1916,  $22.00  a  week,  almost  a  fifty 
cent  increase -since. 1902,  and  this  not  counting  the  increased  cost  of 
feed,  ice  .and  other  articles  in  connection  with  the  upkeep  of  wag- 
ons and  horses.  This  delivery  cost  has  been  determined  at  any- 
where from  .02  to  .03  in  Exhibits  submitted  to  this  Committee. 
The  average  cost  of  delivering  a  nine  cent  bottle  of  milk  was  .023$, 
andit  can  be -safely -said  that  it  is  not  any  less. 

BOTTLES 

With  "the  introduction  of  the  milk  bottle  as  a  convenience  of 
delivery  :an  .added  cost  was  levied  on  the  consumer.  At  the  present 
time  the  loss  of  milk  bottles  to  the  distributor  in  this  city  in  a 
year  would  probably  equal  $750,000.00,  and  the  actual  breakage 
as  shown  by. an  examination  of  the  accounts  of  milk  companies  in 
this  city  is  beyond  the  imagination  of  any  layman.  Up  to  the 
present  time  no  solution  seems  to  have  been  found  to  protect  the 
distributor  in  this  connection.  However,  at  this  writing,  an  inno- 
vation is  being  attempted  by  one  of  the  smaller  dealers  in  Brooklyn 
by  demanding  a  deposit  by  placing  a -stamp  on  the  bottle,  and  no 
doubt  the  result  of  the  experiment  will  be  watched  with  consider- 
able interest. 

SALE  OF  MILK 

The  price  of  milk  to  the  consumer  up  to  1907  as  shown  by  Ex 
hibit^To.  10  was  eight  cents,  but  in  1907  the  price  was  raised  to 
nine  cents  coincident  with  the  raising  of  the  price  .to  the  .farmer, 
but  in  1908  it  was  lowered  temporarily  only  to  go  back  to  nine 
cents  in  1909  and  ten  cents  in  1916  with  the  recent  raise.  In 
1912  a  grade  "  A  "  milk  was  introduced  in  Xew'York  city  to  the 


553  .  ; 

milk  consuming  public  at  a  price  of  ten  cents  per  quart.  This 
miik.liaa  certain  advantages  in  production.  The  Board  of  Health 
inspection  of  the  dairies  producing  it  exacts,  the  utmost  sanitary 
condition,  and  the  fact  that  it  is  all  pasteurized,  bottled  and  sealed 
in  the  country  before  leaving  the  distributor's  station  naturally 
recommends  it  as  a  particularly  safe  article  of  food.  In  1.912  the 
price  of  this  product  was  ten  cents,  in  August  1916  it  was  eleven 
cents  and  in  October,  11)  10,  it  was  raised  to  twelve  cents.  It  has 
been  estimated  variously  that  from  two  and  one-half  and  three  mil- 
lion  quarts  are  consumed  in  the  metropolitan  district  daily.  As 
to  the  actual  quantity  coming  into  the  city  proper,  there  are  no 
reliable,  if  any,  statistics  obtainable.  It  will  be  seen  in  Exhibit 
Xo.  2  that  there  is  a  greater  per  cent,  increase  of  milk  coming  into 
the  New  York  market  at  the  time  the  f ariner  receives  a  high  price 
than  there  is  in  the  months  of  May  and  June  when  he  receives  his 
lowest  price.  It  is  evident  from  this,  therefore,  that  the  price  paid 
to  the  farmer  by  the  manufacturers  of  cheese  in  the  months  of  May 
and  June  is  just  as  protitable  as  the  price  paid  by  the  distributor, 
and  in  addition,  he  has  not  the  exacting-,  conditions-  of  Boards  of 
Health  to  live  up  to. 

An  interesting  study  of  the  distances  which  the  distributor  in 
the  city  has  had  to  go  in  order  to  procure  his  milk  is.  illustrated  in 
the  table  Exhibit  No.  4,  showing  the  cans -of  milk  and  cream  car- 
ried by  the  various  railroads  entering  New  York  City  for  the  past 
fifteen  years.-  In  1902  the  New  Yrork  Central  carried  16  per  cent, 
and  in  1916,  25.8  per  cent.  It  was  not  until  1913  that  the  Penn- 
sylvania road  started  bringing  milk  into  this  city  at  which  time 
it  carried  one-half  of  one  per  cent,  of  all  the  milk,  and  in  1916 
it  raised  its  average  to  nearly  four  per  cent.  These  figures  prove 
conclusively  that  the  distributor  is  going  further  and  further  away 
into  the  country  for  his  product  until  at  this  time  the  distance 
that  he  is  able  to  go  is  only  limited  by  the  number  of  miles  a  milk 
train  can  travel  in  18  hours. 

This  increased  demand  by  the  city  for  fluid  milk  has  been  a 
continual  encroachment  upon  the  natural  supply  of  the  butter 
and  cheese  manufacturers  and  as  this  demand  has  grown  the  but- 
ter and  cheese  factories  are  seeking  other  territory.  At  this  time 
the  great  condenseries  in  this  State  are  finding  it  more  profitable 


554 

to  move  their  factories  to  other  districts,  not  only  where  the  cost  of 
production  is  probably  cheaper,  but  where  the  quantity  of  produc- 
tion is  vastly  greater.  It  might  be  said  at  this  time  that  the 
dairies  of  Illinois  are  producing  one  hundred  pounds  per  day  per 
dairy  more  than  the  dairies  of  this  eastern  territory. 

With  an  approximate  increase  in  the  demand  of  about  2,500 
cans  per  day  per  year  in  the  last  fifteen  years  there  has  developed 
a  problem  that  is  going  to  tax  the  resources  of  the  entire  state  to 
find  a  fair  solution.  In  order  to  meet  the  future  demand  that  is 
bound  to  be  made  by  the  city  consumer  some  inducement  to  more 
intensive  farming  must  be  made  in  order  to  increase  the  supply. 
True,  the  supply  has  increased,  but  in  no  way  like  the  demand. 

An  interesting  study  in  monthly  costs  has  been  prepared  as 
per  Exhibit  ~No.  12,  not  to  show  exact  costs  but  more  to  show  com- 
parative costs  and  profit  and  loss  by  months.  It  naturally  prompts 
the  question  of  a  varying  price  to  the  consumer  at  different  periods 
of  the  year  and  is  included  herewith  for  whatever  benefit  the  Com- 
mittee may  derive  from  it. 

In  conclusion,  it  is  respectfully  recommended  that  some  means 
be  taken  to  give  this  problem  the  painstaking  study  that  it  requires, 
to  the  end  that  strict  application  to  a  study  of  the  problems  be  made 
in  such  a  way  that  the  possibility  of  our  State  losing  its  dairy 
supremacy  will  be  eliminated. 


8 


H 
S 

X 


II 
1.1 


5^ 

"F  ^ 

t    o 


i—  cr  oc  *f  ~  oc  i—  ic  '-c.  o  c-'j  c\i 
-*  ix  co  cc  CM  •:•>  coco  eo  ic  i"  it 

0-  o  c  o  c  q  o  p  o  o  p  o 

1-  ?'i  i'":  x  o  ^  'O  c  ?:  -5  I-H  1-1 


Tf  i-1  O  ^-  t-  :.'.:  C:  ej  ^-  ^  CO  CO 
"*i  T*-  •«*  CT  !•"•''  <N  (N  ?O  CO  ••*•«*  TJH 

ccoccccoooco 


10  1C  0       1C  0  10  0  C  0  O  0 
tVC*  >O  O  ?l  'O  b-  "C  >O  O  »C'  1C 

S^^rowNcoccco^i^iTti 

oooccoooooco 


C^J  t»  O  '"  t»-  'O  IN  r~  C-?  O  1C  "C 
T^-,  &.  CO  CO  »-<|».  CO  W>  b-  •??  >C  >C 

000000000600 


1C  O  LO  O  '—  O  O  d.  O  O  O  O 
C!  >O  C^!  O  O>  O  O  O  O  >C  C  O 

(T.GOcc^T-ooO'—  r^-tvcooo 

illillllllil 


O  *£;  i-C  O  'O  O  O  'C  LC  "C  O  O 
1C  t-  t^  »  t  1^-  'O  »-7  "':  t^»  t^  O  O 
^  O  1^  C-l  00  ^  O  M  rr  J>  O  O 

ic  •*C5(»e»:' 

rf  T.H  CO  C 

cco 


ooooooo 


iCOO 
>-  O  O 


CM  1--  f-i  t>-  >C 

.  T  t-  C:  O  ^H 


Tf  c«r.  oo  Tf 

rf  •*  co  co  c^j  c-i  c-a  n  re  •*  Tti  -^ 

oooooooooooo 


go  o  o  i-  ^'  zr  *T  ;^ 
iC  1C  »C  l^-  t^-  O  >"N  t^- 


t^-  iC  O  1> 


>C  »C  t^.  iT<i  1C  >C  >C  LC 

t^.-<*ocDoooc^iicceoo 

CC  CC  OC  ~M  ~-  ?  3  "-C  C-  "N  ^£  O  O 

TT^cococ^jrO'NfMcocOT^Tf 
oooooooooooo 


»C  O  O  O  O  iC  iO  O  O  O 
t-  iC  1C  "O  »C  J>  ^  1C  O  O 


q  q  q  q  o  o  q  q  p  o 

5  CO  CO  CO  *N  ^  CV  ?N|  CO  CO  CO  CO 


O^O 
0  t-  O  i 


oooqppjc^cicioic 

o  q  q  q  q  q  q  q  q  q  q  q 
~icTc~ico  >c  o  ic  o  o  o  o  o ' 

t-<Mi>O<NOt^POiOOiO 


CO  i-i  O  Tfi  i-( 


556 


H  | 

a  I 

M  ^< 

w  4 

K^  -^ 


rP  VC  (M  «t>  CO  CO  O  l>  b-  i-H  O  U5  CO  <N  >-t       t~  Tj< 
Tl<  C5  CO  rH  1C  T-H  00  Oi  CS  CN  00  *O  t>»  CO  CN       00  CO 

T-H  oo  <N  r-KN  T-H  co  »c"co  co  irTio  cToToT    t»» 

<N  00  CO  rfi  (M  1C  00  (M  O  Tt<  <N  b-  O  CO  OO       tO 
00  OO  Oi  O  I-H  i-H  i-t  <N  <N  CO  »f  rt<  «O  »O  IO       t^ 

SOOOrt<Tf<Oa>C5<Nt^COOCO»OOOO       OOO 

cocoiocorj<o;oo(Mooo5a;oocoo5co     o- 

CO  00  CO  CO  T-H  CO  1O  I-H  00  T*H  00  CO  CO  CN  Oi       CO 
00  00  O5  O  >-H  rH  r-H  <N  <N  CO  CO  •<!<  Tf<  1C  ^        CO 

COOO<N  OOOOOCDO^COT-HOOOOW       Oi  CD" 

•»•>«'»««»*.«»*»»••  ^QJ 

W  CO  1C  00  CO  O5  CO  t^-  CO  l>-  O  CO  Tt*  CN  l^*       1C 

1C  T-H  CO  CO  O  O  £*•  CO  O5  00  CC  t>  Oi  CO  "^       G& 
00  Oi  O5  O  i-H  CM  i-H  M  N  CO  Ttl  •<*  Ttl  CO  CO       t» 

OOOOOt^Oi-HOCO^OOt--  ^"cOOOrh       00  rH 
OOO-*  C^J  (M  t>Ot^  OT-H  rHOlM  O  l>-       OOO 

»ooo 

O5»0 

*'co"    co04 

1-H  b-  1-H  CO  Tt<  <N  Tt*  TjHOl-Ht^O5t>.COO          O5  I> 

Ot^OO  O  O5  O  t-H  O  CO  T*H  CO  OOOOrH       O     • 

»«».«•»»»»-  »»«»»»•  -QQ 

.  ."  .  .Ttl°l  .""I  _  .  .  .1  .  .    ^.oo 

.OCO'*'«tH>T-lO5oboOCDt^OCOCN'!jH   Mi  Oi 
(N  CO  t^  t>-  C5  00  rt*  IN  O<  O  CO  O5  O5  00  ^   <N  i-H 

cot»i-HCOOt^eo<N^T-it^oocot^c3i     coco 

<N  T}<  00  O  l^  00  CO  Oi  O)  CO  T<  CO  iM  1C  1C       CO     • 
t^  <N  CO  <N  00  CN  ^  Ci  t-  00  Oi  O  O  <N  CO       CO  <N 

<M  CO  •*  iracOTHt»COCO  OO3O5  1C  OiC       CO 
t^  t^  00  00  O5  O  O  O  --H  <N  (N  CO  CO  Tf<  -tf       t^ 

OO  CO'cO  iCO5<N<NIMTt<>CCOCD'*CO'-H       CO  »O 

C^JC^OOO^COCO^t^^OOTHrHrHCN         O       • 

rHTj<O5Ot^OO500COCOCOOOOCOCO       rftCO 

^i  co  as  co     co 

t^'*  rHOO         r-H>. 

t^t>OC<J        OOOJ 

.      ,      .      .  ,QO 

^"^oco     tn 

noT    cT 

"II* 

CO 

O5 

"o 

<NCO^>OCO^COC^d^(NCO^iOO  "' 
^C^OOOO^~l^^T~tT~ll~lr~t'^  '-''" 

6 


557 


<      £ 


iflff 
iw 

O     K-     c3    H     Ql 

W  S  o       ft 


*S|H* 

y.S       ft 


I  " 


72 

II 


<N  <N  IN  <N  co  co  co  co  co  co  co  co  co  co  co 


-COO^OOOOOC'-JGOC^COrHGS 


(N  10  r}|  CD  i-H  00  CO  rH  00  00  O  O5  CO  «O  00 
"5  1>  b-'  00  O  <N  O  ^'  CO  O  (N  CO  i-I  •*'  rH 


i-t-cO  O 
t*—  Tfi  Tft-r-i  C 
CO  »O  OO  CO 


(N  rH  lO  (N  OS  O5  t^  O  O  <N  CO  (N  O  >-l  CO       rH  CO 

N  t^  rH  CO  (N  t-  rH  O3  <M  O5  00  CO  rH  t»  O         TjH       • 

Oi  00  CO  CO  <N  I>  00  O  CO  rH  00  lO  iCHO  CO   t-CO 


•^t  iO  ^ 


OOi-t(NLO(MiOGOTfCOOCOa5(NanM        5      ' 
OSt^-^^fOC^i—  tfNCMiOC^^Ot'^^O       JO 


>  O  rH  IN  CO  •*  1C  CO 


558 


a 

§ 

^.  I 

£  I* 


w 


S 


C  0 


>  -  »- 

<M  C  t^  »C  ^i  C-.  (M  03  Ci  OC  •  0  > 
»0  OH>r-iWOCC.  CCt-^iC 


00  OC  t^  rH  CO  1C  <M  CO  T}H  00 


<N  C  IM  00  O  l>  Tfit«  C5  1C  t^  1-1 

(N  •*  ,-H  00  00  CD  00  id  TH«O  r-H  CO 
C-^rHl>        1>T}<O'-I        C100 


r-l  Tf<  <N  i-l  CO  O  i— I  O  t-H  i-i  l^  r-l 

1C  r-i  1C  <N   r-l  TH  1C  1C     C-l 


1>>  t^  O  t^  • 

"T}i<MO 
O5  1C  CO  rH  C 


Tfii-HCCC^T—  tCO' 


<  <N  CO  l>  rj<  <N  CO  >C  IN  CO  t>-     •< 

i  CC  O>  <N  1C  O  00  O5  CO  CM  Tfrl     •< 
3  O  Oi  CO  t^  r- *  CD  l>  rH  CD  O5      •< 


<N<N<NOOr-!OOOOT}<»O»-<l>     -O 


CO  >O  t>  CO  i-l  CD  CO  CO  CO  O  C^J  CO 


(M  CDCOt~»O5  O<N  OOO5N-O     -O3 

CO  »0  CO  IN  T-l  Tf  O  rH  »C  1C  (N  TH   -TH 

t^  »0  00  I>  r-l  CD  rf  t^  b-   (Nt^.  -(N 


559 


"S 

3 

0 
3 

S 
I 

5 

3 

^ 

H 
i 

r 

H 
H 

q 

H 

d 

1 

0 
03 

Daily 
average 

Is-  IO 

TH<M 

CO* 

^2  :lii§S§i 

1 

•^ 

COM       -M  rHt>.O>                CO 

8*0 

co  CT 

!N  CO       IO  rH  M  CO  Cl  !N  CO     •  Tt< 

10  »0         10  -<f  t^  ji  O  rH  0       •  rH 

0 

8 

Forty-quart 
cans 

03  T« 

iO  if. 

CO-*     •  CO  »O  t^  rf  00  'M  t- 

O  <M     •  O  f)  ~*  CO  r-<  {>.  C-l 
•71O     -t^0301QOOOOO3 

§ 

8 

cv  <y. 
<M" 

oo  ^H    •  00  oo  as  t>  cq  oo  iy 

<M  00     •  00  ^>  iO  CO       I-H  r) 

2 

CO 

o 

03 

Daily 
average 

Is 

is 

•*f  O  ^1  CO  t>-  iN  CC 

O  rf  C3  t^  (M  .-(  >C 
O  X  00  C-1  <N  t^- 

^ 

S 

'~(M 

iNrHCOOO 

4! 

^O  rH  lO  »O 

IO  CO  Tf  00  CO  00  O3 

CD  Tf  £•  O  O  rH  00 

10 

o 

I 

o 

10 

Forty-quart 
cans 

I1S1 

CO  00  lO  CO  O  «O  ^ 

0 

P§1 

§rH  IO  O3  CO  O3  rH 
.  t»  »H  -H  00  «O  O 
0--  CO  iO  O       (N  CO 

<N"CO                rH 

10 

o 

a> 

rH 

c8 

c^^Sfe 

OOO3t>  >-l 

OCD  OM<rH^H  rH 

t^  'O  O  N-  1>  O  CO 

-*  CO  CO  CO  rH  CO  O2 

1 

!- 

«0 

N 

<N  rH  CO  O               <N 

4! 

coco 

rHOO 

O3  O3  t^  CO  >0  l^  CO 

CO 

0 

8 

2N_ 

CO  CO  l>  00  O  rH  00 

f 

Forty-quart 
cans 

s§si 

CO  O  CO  00  CO  S  rH 

oT 

co" 

§111 

CM"    of 

rH  IO  O3  IO  CXJ  O3  00 

.:::::::: 

.:::::::: 

jj   ;|j   j 

II 

il 

s 

PC 

«tf 

«i 

II 

New  York,  Ontario  and  Weste 
New  York,  Susquehanna  and  A 
Northern  R.R  
West  Shore  R.R  
New  York,  New  Haven  and  H 
Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  W 
New  York  Central,  long  haul. 
Central  R.  R.  of  New  Jersey  . 
H.  R.  T.  Company  

T.^hicr}!  VnlW 

\- 

1 

t 

tl 

560 


CM  CO  O  CO 
COO5COO 

co"Wco~-c<f 


i^     •  t^»  00  1O  ^     -COCO     •  1C 

)•*'    •T^eoOTj*    -CJC33    -^ 


f 


•cct^    - 

•  CT.  10     • 


•CO>OO(N     "*•*     -O 
•  i— I  Oi  >O  ^t*     •  ^  CO      •  O 


CONCO.1-H     -(Mi-il 


^ 
6 

H 

« 

— 

P4 


561 


"8 

I 

"§ 

o 


"-H 
^O 

H 

s 

1— I 

w 


PH  C*3 
fig 


r-4     -<N»HOOCO 


jTft«.T-f     -COt^^-KXJ 


OOfOOOC)     -iO»OCD 

t^os^HO    •  t^  ro  oo 
coc^acas    -I-HIOCO 


>ooo    -r>.  i^t  pi;  co 


<MO     -OOOOOC^J 


CD.iO 


r-t-Oi  Tt*-r-l  •  OJ'M4  CC'OO 

coi-ioieo  --t«^r-»io 

«O-tH(Nt»  •t^.«D(XJr}< 

c<Tr-«<N  ci"-* 


51OIO 
OTIC 


Tfi^        O 

•-!-*<.     O 
eco> 


i-t-00 


p 


il    ; 


!££§ 


562 


O 

O 


§.« 


qua 
ans 


D 
av 


IT  SI 


I 


ill 

0    O 


iNGCCO     •     -TfOO 


OOCO      •      -lOrHi-H 


00t*»0f0  .(MO  000  •  -»0-*-J 
Tf  10  O3  iO  •  iO  CO  30  h-  •  •  CO  Ol  - 
O  «O  r-H  ifj  •  00  W  O  O3  •  •  I-H  t>  C 


1C  CO  -*  CO     -00>Ot>i-i     • 
iOt>OOM     -rti^HTfO     . 


Tf^HiO     -CO  1C  COO 

r-i  10  co    •  T-H  co  -n*  ^i 

.-Nt^iO     •COr-tC-l^ 


N>OT-HTf  •rWTfcOiO 
OlCTSr-itN.  •QCCOt^O 
O3rJ<>OiO  •COrii-HC^ 


i-i 

COW 


T?<CC 

o  >o 


COCOCOOO  -051000  CO  -lO 

i-ICOlMiO  -iQCOiOCO  •  O3  :S  CO 

Tfi-ir^io  •wcj'.oco  'C^icoo; 

l>iOCOi-i  •  N        COCO  •       »O 


iiOC>     • 


TfTfi 

l  O  CO 


CDiOCOCO  TfClOiO 
OOOiOCO  •  (M  >O  CO  C3 
t^CO^»O  -OOCOi-tCS 


SooSli 

t^Wr-Tl 

O  *O  iO  * 


563 


564 


565 


EXHIBIT  No.  1 

Statement  of  Operating  Costs  for  Butter  Factories 
(From  Committee  Records) 


Pounds 
of  milk 
and  cream 
purcnftsed 

Pounds                Average 
of  butter             pounds  of 
made                milk  used 

Cost 
of  manu- 
facturing 

Average  cost 
per  pound  of 
manufacturing 

Investment 

1,487,673 

74,011                    20.1 

$2,277  00 

I 
.030 

$4,150  00 

1,159,920 

63,810                   18.1 

1,633  00 

.025 

2.450  00 

469,500 

23,475                    20.0 

7,469  49 

.021 

3,000  00 

3,083,800 

142,575                    21.6 

4,105  70 

.028 

5.000  00 

811,830 

41,358                    19.0 

2,066  88 

.05 

4,600  00 

2,160.865 

99,545                    21.0 

3,120  00 

.02 

4,500  00 

677,486 

45,421                     14.0 

2,365  86 

.041 

2,600  00 

1,208,273 

53,438 

22.0 

2,918  92 

.052 

5,250  00 

397,473 

15,393 

25.0 

450  00 

.03 

1,200  00 

679,183 

26,154 

25.0 

450  00 

.017 

1,200  00 

*1,  132,  069 

141,648 

23.0 

3,211  23 

.023 

8,000  00 

1,532.000 

53,500 

28.0 

1,705  00 

.033 

2,650  00 

2,388,337 

108,304 

22.0 

2,420  00 

.022 

3,800  00 

*2,  904,  673 

257,346 

19.0 

8,726  70 

.034 

8,734  52 

270,264 

87,537 

30.0 

2,901  18 

.033 

4,750  00 

Statistics 

Average  pound« 
Average  cost  of 
Average  investr 

of  milk  in  poun 
making  one  pou 
aent  in  butter  fa 

d  of  butter  

21.8 
.0306 
$4,125.63 

nd  of  butter  

ctory  

*  Includes  cream. 


EXHIBIT  No.  8 

Statement  Showing  Approximate  Decrease  in  Pounds  of  Milk  Yielded  Per  Day 
Per  Dairy  in  New  York  State  for  Past  15  Fears 
(From  Milk  Company  Records) 

Average  pounds 
Year  per  day  per  dairy 


1902 
1903 
1904 
1905 
1906 
1907 
1908 
1909 
1910 
1911 
1912 
1913 
1914 
1915 
1916 


Decrease  in  average  pounds  per  day  per  dairy,  1902-1915,  52. 
Per  cent  of  decrease,  18.7  per  cent. 


278 
282 
283 
283 
266 
240 
235 
235 
255 
261 
246 
238 
233 
227 
204 


566 


EXHIBIT  -No.  9 

Statement  Showing  Increasing  Freight  Rate*  on  Milk  Since  1902 
Zone  No.  1—1  to  40  Miles 


MILK  IN  CANS, 
PER  CAN 

MILK  IN  QUART  BOTTLES, 
PER  40  QUARTS 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 

shipments 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Aug.     1, 
Oct.     1, 
Oct.     1, 
Feb.  23, 
Per  cent 

1902 
1903 
1909 
1915 
of  in 

—  Sept   30,  1903 

.184 
.184 
.201 
.211 
9.2 

.235 
.23 
.23 
.242 
2.9 

.248 
.258 
.282 
.296 
15.3 

.31 
.322 
.322 
.338 
.9 

—  Sept.  30,  1909  

—  Feb.   22,  1915  
—  to  date  

crease  since  1902  . 

Zone  No.  2—41  to  100  Miles 


MILK  IN  CANS, 
PER  CAN 

MILK  IN  QUART  BOTTLES, 
PER  40  QUARTS 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Aug.     1,  1902 
Oct.      1,  1903 
Oct.      1,  1909 
Feb.  23,  1915 
Per  cent  of  in 

—  Sept.  30,  1903.  . 
—  Sept.  30,  1909  

.208 
.208 
.228 
.239 
14.9 

.26 
.26 
.26 
.273 
5. 

.272 
.291 
.319 
.334 
22.4 

.34 
.364 
.364 
.382 
12.4 

—  Feb.   22,  1915  
—  to  date  

crease  since  1902  

Zone  No.  3—101  to  190  Miles 


MILK  IN  CANS, 
PER  CAN 

MILK  IN  QUART  BOTTLES, 
PER  40  QUARTS 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Aug.     1,  1902  —  Sept. 
Oct.      1,  1903  —  Sept. 
Oct.     1,1909  —  Feb. 
Feb.  23,  1915  —  to  da 
Per  cent  of  increase  sii 

30,  1903  .. 
30,  1909  

.232 

.232 
.254 
.267 
15. 

.29 
.29 
.29 
.305 
5.2 

.296 
.325 
.355 
.373 
26. 

.37 
.406 
.406 
.426 
15.1 

22,  1915 

te  
ice  1902  

567 


EXHIBIT  No.  9  —  (Continued) 
Zone  No.  4 — over  190  Miles 


MILK  IN  CANS, 
PER  CAN 

MILK  IN  QUART  BOTTLES, 
PER  40  QUARTS 

Carload 
shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
Shipments 

Carload 

shipments 

Less  than 
carload 
shipments 

Aug.     1,  1902 
Oct.      1,  1903 
Oct.      1,  1909 
Feb.  23,  1915 
Per  cent  of  in 

—  Sept.  20,  1903  

.256 
.256 
.28 
.294 
14.  S 

.32 
.32 
.32 
.  .336 
5. 

.32 

.358 
.392 
.412 
.      28.7 

.40 
.448 
.448 
.47 
17.5 

—  Sept.  30,  1909  
—  Feb    22,  1915 

—  to  date  

srease  since  1902  

EXHIBIT  Xo.  10 

Statement  Showing  Increase  and  Percentage  of  Increase  in  Price  of  Milk  to  Con- 
sumer for  Past  15  Years 


DATE 

Pasteurized  B 
(quarts) 

Pasteurized  B 
(pints) 

Pasteurized  A 
(quarts) 

Up  to  1907                                       

$0.08 

1908 

09 

1909                                   

.08 

$0.05 

1910 

.09 

.05 

1911 

09 

05 

1912                                               

.09 

.05 

$0.10 

1913 

.09 

.05 

1914.  .  .                     

.09 

.05 

1915                                             .  .               

.09 

.05 

1916 

10 

.06 

.11 

October   1916 

12 

Percentage  of  increase  

.25 

.20 

.20 

568 


EXHIBIT  ATo.  11 

Statement  of  Wage  Increase  to  Milk  Wagon  Driver  in  New  York  City  for  Pa4  15 

Years 


DATE                                          Weekly 

Commission 

Average 
weekly 
salary 

1902                                                         $13  00 

$0  006  per  point 

$15  00 

1903  .  .                     13  00 

.006  per  point 

15  00 

1904                                                       13  00 

15  00 

1905                                                             .                              13  00 

006  per  point 

15  00 

1906                                             13  00 

.006  per  point 

15  00 

(  i              14  00 
1907  \               15  00 

[     .007  per  point 

18  00 

16  00 
1908  .*  16  00 

.  007  per  point 

18  00 

1909                               .                       .  .              .  .                  16  00 

007  per  point 

18  00 

1910                                                                              :             16  00 

18  00 

1911                                                                                           16  00 

007  per  point 

18  00 

1912                                                              .                            16  00 

007  per  point 

18  00 

1913          .                     ...               16  00 

007  per  point 

18  00 

1914                                                              .                            16  00 

18  00 

1915                                                                                               16  00 

.007  per  point 

18  00 

r  j        19  oo 

1916  \  \             20  00 

[     .007  per  point 

22  00 

M             21  00 

J 

Percentage  of  increase,  46.6. 


569 


g 

is 


111 


5 

•^    < 


a 

c 

^ 

H 

r— ! 

p; 
— 

x 

f-r-1 


II 


5  CO  t^  05  r-(  ^H  < 

1  <N  (N  (N  CO  CCS 

§O  OOOC 
oo  o  o< 


THTjtrccco-jiricoc'O-tirf-ff'* 


G         Qi 

11 
S£ 


t-I^OO  CC  >C  lOO  O  I 


§§§§§§§§ 
ft ' 


570 


SCHEDULE  No.  1 

Statement  of  Zones  Established  as  a  Basis  for  Freight  Rates  on  Milk  Delivered  to 
New  York  City  May  14,  1897 


MILK  —  40  QUARTS 

CREAM  —  40  QUARTS 

Cans 

Quart 

Pint 

Cans 

Quart 

Pint 

bottles 

bottles 

bottles 

bottles 

Zone  No.  1:       1  to    40  miles. 
Zone  No.  2:    41  to  100  miles. 

$0.23 
.26 

$0.31 
.34 

$0.35 
.38 

$0.41 
.44 

$0.49 
.52 

$0.53 
.56 

Zone  No.  3:  101  to  190  miles. 

.29 

.37 

.41 

.47 

.55 

.59 

Zone  No.  4:  over  190  miles.  .  . 

.32 

.40 

.44 

.50 

.58 

.62 

PROFITS  IN  MILK  DISTRIBUTION 

The  average  reader  in  the  limited  amount  of  time  will  not  be 
able  to  draw  from  the  accountant's  reports  herewith  set  out  in 
full  the  many  interesting  conclusions  that  are  to  be  drawn  there- 
from and  the  Committee  has  undertaken  with  the  aid  of  the  ac- 
countant to  set  out  some  of  these  conclusions  in  the  following 
schedules,  leaving  to  the  student  of  those  matters  to  draw  from  the 
full  reports  such  lessons  as  they  afford  and  to  check,  if  he  so  de- 
sires, the  outstanding  facts  presented  in  the  following  schedules. 
Perhaps  the  most  interesting  at  this  time  will  be  an  examination 
of  the  costs  entering  into  the  9-cent  bottle  of  milk,  which  are  shown 
on  the  following  pages : 


EXHIBIT  No.  256 

STATEMENT  OF  CHARGES  FOR  PRODUCING  AND  DELIVERING  A 

CENT  QUART  OF  PASTEURIZED  GRADE  "  B  "  MILK  —  OFFERED 
IN  TESTIMONY  BEFORE  THE  JOINT  LEGISLATURE  COMMITTEE 
ON  DAIRY  PRODUCTS  (HoN.  CHARLES  W.  WICKS,  CHAIR- 
MAN), BY  HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS,  C.  P.  A. 


[571] 


EXHIBIT  No.  256 

January  20,  1917. 

Agreeable  to  your  request  I  am  attaching  herewith,  a  composite 
statement  of  the  cost  of  producing  and  distributing  a  sufficient 
quantity  of  milk  to  be  sold  as  a  quart  in  a  bottle  at  .09. 

These  figures  are  the  result  of  a  fine  analysis  of  production  and 
distributing  costs  of  five  of  the  larger  companies  in  Greater  ISTew 
York,  together  with  information  as  to  costs  contained  in  various 
reports  received  from  other  companies  in  this  city  and  throughout 
the  state,  and  turned  over  to  me  by  your  Committee  for  examina- 
tion. 

The  figures  herein  contained  are  not  typical  of  all  milk  handled 
but  of  such  milk,  popularly  known  as  Grade  "  B  n  pasteurized 
milk  sold  during  the  year  1915  or  during  fiscal'  period  of  1915- 
1916  at  a  price  of  .09  per  quart. 

In  conclusion,  so  that  no  false  impression  may  be  created,  I  wish 
to  say  that  the  average  selling  price  of  all  milk  purchased,  whether 
disposed  of  as  milk,  cream,  cheese  or  butter,  is  much  less  than  .09, 
the  subject  of  which  will  be  taken  up  in  detail  in  a  later  report  to 
the  Committee. 

Very  truly  yours, 

HERBERT  B.  HAWKINS, 

Certified  Public  Accountant. 


574 

EXHIBIT  ISTo.  256 

1915-1916 

Selling  price .09 

Cost  of  milk 03797 

Country  charges  . 00297 

Teaming  and  hauling 00294 

Pasteurization     00370 

Bottles  and  caps 00241 

Delivery  expenses 02384 

Freight    00934 

Adm.,  clerical  and  adv 00319 


Total  cost 08636 

Profit 00364 

Total.  ,  .09000        .09 


In  connection,  however,  with  this  Exhibit  No.  256,  it  is  im- 
portant for  everyone  interested  to  consider  the  following  statement 
made  by  the  accountant: 

STATEMENT  A 

The  profit  or  loss  on  the  9-cent  bottle  of  Grade  "B"  pasteurized  milk  de- 
scribed in  Exhibit  258  does  not  provide  for  any  reduced  profit  or  losses  on  milk 
purchased  by  the  distributor  for  which  he  may  have  no  retail  market  at  nine 
cents  a  quart,  but  instead  thereof  necessarily  disposes  of  the  same  at  wholesale 
prices  or  in  other  forms,  such  as  sour  milk,  sour  cream,  pot  cheese,  butter,  etc., 
or  \vhich  may  be  lost  or  destroyed,  or  spoil  on  his  hands  for  some  other  reason. 

Likewise,  the  costs  included  in  Exhibit  256  do  not  provide  for  any  earnings 
on  capital  invested,  or  for  the  creation  of  capital  reserves  of  any  kind.  Such 
necessary  business  overheads  as  capital,  interest,  or  earnings  must  be  provided 
for  in  addition  thereto.  In  other  words,  they  are  to  be  found,  if  at  all,  out  of 
the  item  of  .00364  set  out  therein.  How  important  a  bearing  these  two  factors 
have  upon  the  average  profit  of  milk  distributors  is  shown  by  the  following 
statement : 

By  averaging  the  net  profits  of  the  companies  used  to  reach  the  conclusions 
shown  in  Exhibit  256,  it  is  shown  that  the  average  profit  of  those  companies  on 
each  quart  of  milk  bought,  regardless  of  whether  it  was  disposed  of  as  market 
milk,  butter,  cheese,  or  otherwise,  was  found  to  be  .0027,  out  of  which  item 
must  be  found  all  capital  earnings,  dividends  and  capital  reserves  for  the  car- 
rying on  of  the  business. 


575 


In  other  words,  the  average  profit  of  .0036  on  the  9-cent  bottle  was  reduced 
to  the  average  of  .0027  on  the  entire  purchases  by  lower  profits  or  losses  on 
wholesale  milk,  butter,  cheese,  or  wasted  product. 

For  comparative  purposes,  the  following  statement  is  made: 


SCHEDULE  B 

Earning  on 
Trading     tangible  as- 
profit  on    sets  at  book 
year's   value  exclusive 
basis      of  good-will, 
etc. 


Tangible  assets 
in  business  ex- 
clusive of  good 
will,  etc. 


Company 

Borden  Company,  Farm  Products 
Division,  East  and  West,  Chicago 
to  New  York 0372% 


Clover  Farms  Company,  Inc 0314% 

By  excluding  a  certain  item  of  de- 
preciation written  off  on  the 
books  of  this  company  and  criti- 
cized by  the  auditor,  the  capital 
earning  item  is  made  in  the  above 
company,  .0554.  The  capital 
investment  of  this  company 
would  show  earnings  of  11  per 
cent  on  milk  traffic,  exclusive  of 
reductions  thereof  shown  in  store 
operations. 

Alex.  Campbell  Company .0387% 

Sheffield  Farms  Slawson-Decker  Co.       .0304% 


.0574%     $15,000,000  00 

(Estimated  appor- 
tionment of  capi- 
tal.) 
.0438%          $540,678  64 


.0930%          $808,593  46 
,0485%      $6,227,171  46 


It  suggests  itself  that  no  ordinary  business  could  be  maintained 
on  a  trading  profit,  per  dollar  of  sales,  so  low  as  shown  by  the 
above  figures.  It  is  possible  to  do  so,  however,  in  the  milk  busi- 
ness and  pay  dividends  and  establish  reserves  because  of  the  quick 
and  almost  constant  turnover  of  capital. 


SCHEDULE  C 
Profits  on  Milk  Handled 


Company 


Borden  Company,  Eastern  branches, 
Buffalo  and  east 

Clover  Farms,  Inc 

Alex.  Campbell  Company,  Inc 

Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Com- 
pany   


Quarts  of 
milk  handled 

218,820,305 
19,536,650 
25,258,977 


Net  profit 

Net  profit     per  100 
per    quart     pounds 


.002915 

.0024 

.002979 


135,251,200  .00243 


Average  net  profits 0027  plus 


.1355 
.1115 
.1385 

.1130 
.1246 


5T6 

It  will  be  apparent  from  the  above  schedule  that  if  these  four 
companies,  and  undoubtedly  all  the  others,  had  paid  to  the  dairy- 
men of  the  State  during  the  year  1915,  1916,  their  entire  profits, 
capital  earnings  and  dividends,  it  would  have  brought  to  the  dairy- 
men less  than  12%  cents  per  100  pounds  more  than  they  actually 
did  receive.  But  the  dairymen  have  fairly  established  during  the 
months  from  October,  1916  to  April,  1917,  an  increased  price  of 
45  cents  to  50  cents  per  100  pounds  over  the  year  in  question,  or 
an  increase  nearly  four  times  greater  than  the  average  profit, 
dividends  and  earnings  made  by  these  companies  during  the  prior 
year. 

From  these  figures  it  becomes  at  once  obvious  that  the  cost  of 
the  product  must  be  advanced  to  the  consumer  unless  .great 
economies  are  found  in  methods  of  distribution.  Some  light  is 
thrown  upon  the  varying  profits  of  these  companies  by  the  follow- 
ing comparative  table: 

COST  OF  MILK  PER  HUNDRED  POUNDS,  JULY  1,  1915  TO  JUNE  30,  1916 

Purchase  price  Purchase  price 

Company                                         per  quart  per  cwt. 

Borden  Company. .036847  $1 .713   plus 

Clover  Farms,  Inc .0355  1.6511  plus 

Alex.  Campbell  Company,  Inc .  035365  1 . 6447  plus 

Sheffield  Farms,  Slawson-Decker  Company. . .                .  037757  1 . 7474  plus 

Assuming  .the  average  daily  consumption  in  New  York  city  to  be 
2,200,000  quarts,  the  milk  handled  by  the  four  above  companies 
would  be  about  49  per  cent  of  the  whole.  However,  a  large  part 
of  the  milk  referred  to  above  as  handled  by  the  Eorden  Company 
does  not  reach  the  New  York  market  at  all,  as  those  figures  com- 
prise the  Eastern  division  in  various  cities  in  New  York  and  other 
surrounding  states,  so  that  these  companies  probably  do  not  supply 
33  per  cent,  of  the  New  York  market. 

UNNECESSARY  COSTS  OF  DISTRIBUTION 

It  is  easily  determined,  both  from  the  audit  of  the  books  of  tlie 
companies  engaged  in  the  distribution  of  milk  in  the  city  of  New 
York  and  from  the  testimony  of  all  concerned,  that  this  business 
is  conducted  on  an  extremely  competitive  basis.  All  who  have 
fairly  studied  the  question  can  see  that  a  large  part  of  the  cost 


577 

of  distribution  arises  from  the  bitter  competition  existing  in  the 
distribution  of  the  product.  This  competition  does  not  consist  in 
two  or  three  route  drivers  standing  at  the  apartment  house  door 
under-bidding  each  other  for  the  privilege  of  delivering  the  morn- 
ing's milk.  'Obviously  while  two  drivers  were  engaged  in  that 
competition,  the  third  would  be  supplying  two  or  three  or  their 
regular  customers ;  but  it  does  apply  to  every  other  side  of  distri- 
bution that  has  been  presented  to  the  Committee.  Customers  are 
bought  and  paid  for.  The  man  who  can  control  a  group  of  cus- 
tomers is  eagerly  sought.  Everything  that  can  influence  the  cus- 
tomer or  make  it  easy  to  reach  him  or  control  his  trade  is  bought 
and  paid  for.  An  army  of  solicitors  and  sales  agents  are  main- 
tained to  go  about  from  block  to  block  to  procure  customers.  Every 
available  agency  is  sought  for  this  end.  Great  and  expensive  or- 
ganizations are  maintained  purely  and  entirely  devoted  to  carry- 
ing on  the  business  on  a  competitive  basis. 

Overhead  charges  attributable  to  this  work  alone  amount 
to  an  alarming  sum,  and  it  becomes  difficult  on  the  part 
of  the  concern  with  limited  capital  to  meet  this  daily  fierce 
competition.  Only  the  strongest  can  engage  in  it  and  ulti- 
mately survive,  and  yet  it  is  a  purely  competitive  struggle. 
It  is  customary  in  referring  to  unnecessary  expenses  in 
milk  distribution  to  refer  to  the  fact  that  four  or  six  or  ten  milk 
wagons  and  milk  drivers  visit  the  same  block  which  one  might 
well  supply,  but  this  ignores  the  really  greater  expense  of  the 
silent  army  of  retainers  that  accompanies  and  follows  the  milk 
wagon  in  its  daily  round.  This  army  is  marshaled  by  each  com- 
pany and  sets  out  daily  to  capture  the  other  man's  customers.  Not 
only  do  we  find  in  a  single  block  six  wagons  and  horses  and  drivers 
where  one  might  well  do  the  work,  but  on  the  same  day  we  fird 
operating  in  the  same  block  six  solicitors;  six  route  superintend- 
ents having  general  charge  and  direction  of  their  activities;  six 
staffs  of  clerks  and  bookkeepers  who  will  devote  part  of  their  time 
and  attention  to  that  block  for  that  day,  and  each  and  every  part 
of  perhaps  twenty  other  companies  devoting  to  the  certain  block 
a  portion  of  their  time  and  the  consumer's  money  in  the  struggle 
to  ascertain  which  company  shall  survive  in  rendering  its  inhabi- 
19 


578 

tants  a  single  service.  It  may  safely  be  said  that  no  person  of 
understanding  has  ever  studied  this  question  without  reaching  the 
conclusion  that  the  distribution  of  milk  is  a  public  service,  which, 
to  be  put  upon  an  economic  basis,  requires  public  regulation  to  the 
end  that  all  unnecessary  services  even  of  a  competitive  kind  may 
be  eliminated. 

DISTRIBUTION    OF    MILK    SHOULD    BE    A    REGULATED    PUBLIC 

SERVICE 

The  unnecessary  competitive  disbursement  of  one  company  ex- 
amined into,  amounted  to  nearly  $200,000  during  the  year  in 
question.  It  is  safe  to  assert  that  the  consumer  in  the  city  of  New 
York  pays  several  millions  of  dollars  annually  for  the  privilege 
of  having  all  the  numerous  purveyors  of  this  necessity  of  life  en- 
gage in  attempts  to  serve  him.  During  a  period  when  labor  costs 
in  the  production  of  milk  were  little  considered  and  an  abundant 
milk  supply  was  at  hand  at  a  comparatively  low  price,  this  question 
did  not  assume  the  importance  which  it  now  has.  Coupled  with 
the  ascending  ,scale  of  costs  in  all  other  food  products,  the  matter' 
becomes  at  once  acute.  A  milk  supply  is  as  much  a  daily  neces- 
sity and  even  more  so  than  either  gas  or  electricity.  While  the 
milk  dealer  needs  no  public  franchise  except  from  the  Department 
of  Health,  yet  he  must  utilize  every  public  instrumentality  and 
franchise  that  exists  in  order  to  properly  supply  the  daily  demand. 
The  railroad  company  is  required  to  furnish  its  most  efficient  and 
fastest  service.  The  ferry  and  express  hasten  to  aid  and  co-operate. 
Without  this  constant  co-operation  of  every  public  instrumentality, 
great  suffering  would  result. 

Enjoying  each  and  every  one  of  these  public  franchises  and  in- 
strumentalities, and  it  being  conceded  that  upon  the  supply  of  milk 
rests  the  health  and  life  of  the  growing  children  of  the  cities,  can 
it  be  said  that  this  matter  of  distribution  is  not  a  subject  of  public 
regulation  and  control?  There  must  be  within  the  State  suffici- 
ent reserve  of  police  power  upon  this  question,  so  vital  to  the 
public  health  and  welfare,  to  insure  the  distribution  of  milk  to 
the  people  of  the  State  without  interruption  or  delay,  without 
fraud  or  oppression,  and  without  being  charged  with  the  constant 


579 

burden  of  unnecessary  expense.  The  time  has  come  when  this 
problem  should  be  solved,  if  it  is  to  be  solved  at  all,  and  it  certainly 
seems  as  if  the  dairymen  of  this  State  and  the  distributors  with 
their  invested  capital,  and  the  consumer,  should  co-operate  to  the 
end  that  these  unnecessary  competitive  wastes  be  eliminated  and 
the  dairymen's  milk  brought  to  the  consumer  at  the  lowest  possible 
expense.  It  is  confidently  believed  that  this  will  be  done,  by  the 
business  genius  of  our  people,  if  the  State  by  adequate  legislation 
will  permit. 

The  investigations  of  this  Committee  lead  to  the  conclusion  that 
under  the  present  competitive  system  it  takes  almost  as  many  men 
to  bring  the  dairyman's  milk  to  the  consumer  as  there  are  dairymen 
engaged  in  the  production  of  milk  with  all  their  employees.  This 
is  the  result  of  the  purely  competitive  basis  upon  which  the  business 
is  handled.  Three  or  four  milk  stations  are  being  maintained  with 
a  separate  force  of  employees  to  collect  or  receive  the  dairymen's 
milk  at  many  points  where  one  well  equipped  station  with  a  compe- 
tent force  could  do  all  the  collecting  at  one-fifth  the  present  expense. 
This  unnecessary  duplication  of  service  follows  with  all  its  atten- 
dant overhead  and  capital  investment  from  the  country  milk  station 
until  the  bottle  of  milk  is  finally  deposited  at  the  consumer's  door. 
A  large  part  of  this,  in  the  judgment  of  this  'Committee,  could  and 
should  be  eliminated.  If  the  people  of  the  cities  are  to  have  any 
relief  from  the  ascending  scale  of  prices,  these  factors  must  be 
eliminated.  It  only  remains  to  devise  satisfactory  methods  so  to 
do.  The  only  solution  possible  is  to  limit  and  leave  only  those  in 
the  field  which  the  service  actually  requires.  This  is  just  as  obvi- 
ous in  the  case  of  milk  as  it  is  in  gas  or  any  other  daily  necessity 
supplied  in  small  quantity  to  the  consumer.  From  these  conclu- 
sions there  seems  to  be  no  escape. 

It  is  believed  by  the  Committee  that  a  State  Department 
equipped  with  all  the  power  permitted  by  our  laws  should 
be  created,  having  the  capacity  to  thoroughly  analyze  and  com- 
prehend the  present  situation,  and  having  realized  and  compre- 
hended it,  to  provide  ways  and  means,  so  far  as  our  laws  and  the 
welfare  of  the  State  permit,  to  consolidate  this  service,  not  only  in 
New  York,  but  in  every  city  of  the  State,  to  the  end  that  the  ex- 
pense thereof  be  reduced  to  a  minimum,  that  the  profits  realized 


580 

thereon  be  only  such  as  are  recognized  as  fair  and  reasonable.  In 
this  way  it  is  believed  that  the  consumer  can  secure  this  necessity 
of  life  at  a  price  which  will  afford  a  fair  return,  to  the  producer  and 
a  just  earning,  and  only  a  just  earning,  to  the  capital  engaged  in 
distribution.  The  dairyman  of  the  State,  ignoring  and  disregard- 
ing the  law  which  has  become  practically  ineffectual  for  any  pur- 
pose, has  so  organized  as  to  protect  his  own  interests,  without  action 
by  the  State  government.  He  contends  that  the  State  government 
disregarded  his  distress  and  that  he  was  forced  to  take  action  from 
economic  necessity.  Those  who  contend  that  these  matters  had  best 
be  regulated  by  the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  pay  no  heed  to  the 
evident  situation  that  the  law  of  supply  and  demand  had  absolutely 
ceased  to  operate  in  regard  to  the  milk  supply,  because  of  the  effec- 
tive organization  of  the  consumer  in  a  city  society,  and  the  lack  of 
a  similar  organization  in  the  social  relations  of  the  producer.  The 
considerations  here  stated  take  no  note  of  the  importance  to  the 
State  of  the  continuance  of  a  prosperous  dairy  industry,  which  is 
as  important  as  any  phase  of  the  matter  here  considered,  but  which 
is  discussed  in  other  parts  of  this  report-. 

How  Two  NEW  MIDDLEMEN  WERE  CREATED 

As  before  suggested,  the  last  few  years  show  the  development  of 
a  new  class  of  middlemen  in  the  milk  traffic.  Formerly,  and  it 
might  be  said  still,  the  distributor  collected  the  milk  at  the  country 
station,  prepared  it,  transported  it  to  the  city  and  delivered  it  to  the 
customer.  Of  late  years  groups  of  dairymen,  in  order  to  control  the 
disposition  of  their  milk,  have  undertaken  through  the  formation 
of  companies,  to  construct  milk  stations  of  their  own.  These  have 
been  operated  in  two  ways :  First,  by  lease  to  the  milk  companies, 
the  lease  carrying  with  it  provisions  designed  to  afford  the  dairy- 
men a  better  price  for  their  milk!  during  the  continuance  of  the 
lease.  Second,  by  being  operated  by  the  dairymen's  company  and 
the  product  of  the  station  disposed  of  from  time  to  time  to  the  high- 
est bidder  in  the  open  market. 

The  last  method  of  operation  obviously  is  not  welcome  to  the 
distributor.  The  distributor  regards  such  handling  of  the  milk  'as 
rendering  his  yearly  supply  uncertain  and  permitting  the  control 
of  the  price  to  be  paid  from  year  to  year  to  rest  in  the  hands  of 


581 

the  dairyman.  Therefore  the  dairymen's  company  or  milk 
station,  unless  leased  to  the  larger  milk  companies,  found  it  difficult 
to  locate  a  buyer.  The  distributors,  in  their  anxiety  to  keep  the  con- 
trol of  the  milk  in  their  own  stations,  left  the  field  open  for  the 
development  of  a  class  of  middlemen  who  promptly  took  over  the 
milk  supply  from  the  dairymen's  station.  Their  operations  were 
attended  with  success  during  the  past  two  and  one-half  years 
because  of  a  scarcity  created  by  war  conditions  and  the  attendant 
high  price  for  cheese  and  butter.  Under  other  conditions,  the 
operation  of  these  middlemen  would  probably  have  resulted  in 
lower  prices  for  the  dairymen  attempting  to  operate  their  stations. 
Under  the  prevailing  conditions  it  afforded  an  opportu- 
nity for  the  middlemen  to  make  large  profits  for  the  time  being 
and  those  profits  the  middleman  promptly  proceeded  to  take  in  the 
good  old  way.  The  large  distributor,  being  short  of  the  necessary 
daily  supply  from  time  to  time,  would  pay  a  high  premium  to  the 
new  broker  or  middleman.  This  broker  or  middleman  had  no 
capital  investment  whatever,  but  was  availing  himself  of  the  dairy- 
men's capital  and  needs  created  by  the  European  war.  On  the  one 
hand  he  assumed  to  sell  the  milk  for  the  dairymen  on  a  certain  com- 
mission which  carried  with  it  the  necessary  implied  agreement 
that  he  would  secure  the  best  price  possible.  On  the  other  hand, 
he  either  sold  it  to  himself  or  charged  a  further  commission  an<? 
profit  for  himself  when  he  turned  it  over  to  the  distributor.  The 
development  of  this  type  of  middleman  and  his  methods  are  best 
exemplified  by  the  following  evidence  received  by  the  Committee, 
which  is  here  presented  without  further  comment : 

JOHN  F.  DOYLE,  called  as  a  witness,  being  sworn,  testified : 
"  I  live  at  No.  970  St.  John's  Place, Brooklyn,  and  am  the  presi- 
dent of  the  Modern  Dairy  Company.  This  company  was  incor- 
porated in  August,  1914,  with  a  capital  stock  of  $50,000,  $20,000 
of  that  has  been  issued ;  $10,000  of  it  was  sold  when  we  incorpo- 
rated,—  the  balance  since.  The  incorporators  were  myself,  Wil- 
liam J.  McKay,  and  William  Richmond.  We  took  all  the  stock 
that  was  issued  at  that  time.  That  was  $4,500  par  value.  Each 
of  us  received  $1,500  par  value  of  the  stock.  Richmond  lives  in 
Sharpstown,  New  Jersey,  and  had  been  in  the  milk  business  before. 
He  owned  a  plant  at  TJnionville.  That  has  been  recently  sold  to 


582 

the  Hires  Chocolate  Company.  He  was  operating  the  plant  at 
Unionville  and  Sharpstown,  New  Jersey,  at  that  time.  He  brought 
the  milk  to  the  city  and  sold  it  in  a  wholesale  way  to  milk  dealers. 
I  had  been  in  the  milk  business  prior  to  1914  with  the  McDermott 
Dairy  Company.  Mr.  McKay  and  I  decided  upon  going  into  the 
business  and  then  we  met  Richmond.  The  first  year  we  were  in 
business  we  got  our  milk  from  our  creamery  at  Harford  Mills. 
We  bought  a  creamery  from  the  Standard  Butter  Company.  It 
is  about  22  miles  from  Qwego  on  the  Lehigh  Valley  Railroad.  We 
got  there  about  an  average  of  TO  cans  a  day  of  milk.  We  sold  that 
in  Brooklyn  wholesale  to  restaurants,  hotels,  bakeries,  lunch  rooms, 
etc.  Whatever  we  needed  above  that  we  got  from  Mr.  Richmond 
at  Unionville.  We  ran  that  way  eight  or  nine  months.  Then  my 
brother,  James  A.  Doyle,  came  into  the  company  from  the  Shef- 
field Farms.  That  was  the  spring  of  1915.  He  took  $1,500' worth 
of  stock.  Then  a  young  man,  by  the  name  of  John  Marass  took 
$1,000  worth  of  stock;  that  is,  he  subscribed  for  it,  but  never  paid 
for  it.  He  only  stayed  a  month.  Then  in  November  or  December, 
1915,  Mr.  K  A.  Van  San  purchased  the  $1,50-0  of  stock  that  my 
brother  had  and  became  a  director. 

Mr.  Ward. —  This  $6,000  was  all  paid  for  in  cash? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  was  it  paid  for  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  $2,000'  was  given  to  Mr  McKay  and  myself  for 
good  will,  trade,  leases,  etc.  So  that  I  paid  $500,  McKay  paid 
$500  and  Richmond  $1,500. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  made  $2,500,  so  there  was  really  $2,500  in 
cash  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. — At  the  commencement,  yes. 
Mr.  Ward.—  What  was  that  $2,000  given  for  ? 
Mr.  Doyle. —  Leases,  good-will  or  trade,  etc. 
Mr.  Ward.—  What  trade  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  The  trade  that  I  had  promised  to  secure  for  the 
business  when  we  started. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  I  suppose  it  was  given  to  you  because  of 
your  experience  in  this  milk  business. 


583 

]\Ir.  Doyle. —  Partially,  yes ;  we  had  the  promise  of  business ; 
that  is  all ;  what  we  could  do  in  the  milk  business.  Richmond  paid 
in  cash  and  equipment.  He  furnished  a  horse  and  the  balance  in 
cash,  so  that  I  paid  in  $500  in  money;  McKay  paid  in  $500  in 
money,  and  Richmond  paid  in  $1,250  in  money,  and  a  horse. 
That  was  real  money  and  went  into  the  bank  account.  Then  my 
brother  came  in  and  paid  in  $1,600  in  money  and  went  to  work 
for  the  company  and  stayed  with  us  until  October  or  November 
and  then  went  out.  Mr.  Van  San  bought  his  stock.  I  don't  know 
how  he  bought  it.  After  that,  Van  San  was  employed  by  our  com- 
pany. I  had  known,  him  seven  or  eight  months. 

Mr.  Ward. —  During  those  7"  or  8  months,  what  had  been  his 
business  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  He  was  salesman  for  country  creameries  'and  we 
purchased  milk,  cream  and  condensed  milk  from  them.  He  was 
representing  the  Hamden  Cooperative  'Creamery  Company  at 
Hamden,  N.  Y.,  and  the  Chemung  Dairy  Products  Company  was 
another.  He  sold  it  to  us  at  a  price.  Whether  he  worked  on  a 
commission,  straight  salary  or  how,  I  don't  know.  He  sold  the 
milk  either  on  a  commission  or  salary  basis  for  the  cooperative  com- 
panies and  then  we  jobbed  or  wholesaled  the  milk  to  the  general 
wholesale  trade.  He  stayed  with  us  about  a  year.  He  was  treas- 
urer of  the  company  and  went  into  the  country  and  took  care  of 
the  creamery  work  and  made  contracts  for  milk  from  November, 
1915.  Then  he  got  out  of  the  company  and  sold  his  stock  back  to 
the  company,  to  the  Modern  Dairy  Company.  We  paid  for  it 
out  of  our  company  funds.  The  stock  certificates  were  turned  over 
to  us  and  they  are  now  in  our  safe,  fifteen  of  them,  and  the  other 
forty-five  Mr.  Richmond  has.  Van  San  had  sixty  shares.  First, 
he  got  my  brother's  fifteen  shares.  We  had  increased  our  capital 
to  $60,000.  We  gave  one  share  to  each  stockholder  for  each  share 
that  was  issued. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is,  there  were  $6,000  already  issued  of  which 
$3,750'  had  been  paid  for.  Now  you  gave  each  one  of  those  share- 
holders, you  divided  among  Van  San,  McKay  and  Doyle  $6,000 
more  of  new  stock  without  getting  any  money  for  it. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir. 


584 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  was  a  stock  dividend,  or  something. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is,  they  did  not  pay  anything  for  it. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  !No,  sir;  and  we  gave  Mr.  Richmond  $2,500  worth 
of  stock  for  2,000  cans  that  he  had.  There  was  $26,300  issued. 
That  is  all  that  was  issued.  The  rest  has  not  been  issued. 

Before  we  increased  to  $50,000,  Richmond  had  $1,900'  in  stock. 
We  at  one  time  gave  him  $400  for  some  equipment  he  gave  us.  I 
forget  whether  that  was  in  1915  or  1916,  so  he  had  at  least  $1,900, 
and  the  other  three  had  $1,500'  each  at  the  time  we  increased  the 
capitalization.  There  was  '$7,900  issued,  as  I  understand  it. 
Marass  never  got  any  stock  because  he  did  not  pay  for  it.  In 
August,  1916,  McKay  had  $2,000  in  stock  and  I  had  $2,000  and 
Van  San  had  $2,000.' 

At  the  time  Mr.  Van  $an  came  in,  there  was  $500'  worth  of  stock 
given  to  Mr.  Van  'San  as  a  bonus. 

Mr.  Ward. —  For  coming  in  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  For  good-will  of  certain  trade  that  he  had.  He 
was  in  the  shipping  business  and  he  was  shipping  to  different 
people,  the  Malone  Dairy  Company,  Locust  Farms,  Clover  Farms, 
here  in  the  city.  He  was  selling  and  that  trade  was  turned  over  to 
the  Modern  Dairy  Company.  He  was  selling  the  goods  for  those 
cooperative  creamery  companies.  He  paid  $1,500  for  stock  and 
was  donated  $500  more  for  this  good-will, —  the  trade  he  turned 
over, —  The  Malone  Dairy  Company,  Locust  Farms,  Clover  Fa.rms, 
different  people.  They  were  distributors  who  used  to  buy  milk 
from  him  but  instead  of  buying  from  him  after  that  they  bought 
from  the  Modern  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  Mr.  Van  S'an  arrange  that  they  were  to  buy 
from  you  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  for  that  he  was  to  get  $5  00  in  stock  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir.  Then  I  and  McKay  each  took  $500 
worth  of  stock  as  a  part  of  our  salary  for  the  past  year.  We  had 
been  paid  a  salary,  but  it  was  not  considered  what  we  were  worth 
or  what  we  could  earn  at  other  places.  That  is,  at  the  end  of  the 


585 

year  it  was  not  considered  that  we  had  been  adequately  paid  so  we 
were  voted  $500  more  and  Van  San  was  voted  for  his  coming  in. 
That  made  $7,900.  Then  we  increased  the  stock  to  $50,000,  and 
$7,900  of  the  new  stock  was  given  to  each  of  us  as  follows:  Rich- 
mond got  $1,900;  I  got  $2,000;  McKay  got  $2,000,  and  Van  San 
got  $2,000.  That  left  stock  issued  $15,800.  That  stock  repre- 
sented an  initial  cash  payment  of  $3,750  in  money  and  one  horse. 
Then  we  needed  cans  and  Richmond  had  2,000  and  we  gave  him 
$1.25  each  in  stock.  Then  he  sold  $8,000  worth  of  stock;  Rich- 
mond, McKay  and  Van  San  and  myself  each  took  $2,000.  We 
paid  for  that  in  cash.  They  actually  paid  cash  into  the  concern 
and  it  went  into  our  bank  account.  That  made  $26,300  issued, 
but  we.  purchased  back  $6,000  from  Van  San,  all  he  had  after  a 
year.  We  paid  him  $1,500  in  cash.  Mr.  Richmond  paid  him 
$4,500'  and  the  company  gave  Richmond  a  note  for  $4,500'.  All 
that  Van  San  had  paid  in  for  this  $6,000  worth  was  $2,000  in 
money  and  whatever  he  paid  my  brother  for  his  stock.  That  left 
the  company  with  $20,300-  in  stock  outstanding.  That  stock  repre- 
sents $8,250  in  money  and  the  horse  and  cans  mentioned.  We 
have  issued  no  stock  since. 

Mr.  Van  San  has  been  and  is  now  representing  farmers'  cream- 
eries. He  was1  selling  milk  for  them.  He  is  selling  milk  for 
certain  cooperative  plants  on  a  commission.  I  believe  he  has  an 
arrangement  to  get  a  certain  per  cent  for  selling.  He  sold  that 
milk  through  our  company,  the  Modern  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  understand,  then,  that  he  sold  that  milk  to  your 
company,  the  Modern  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  It  was  handled  through  our  company,  yes ;  it  was 
sold  to  other  customers  by  the  Modern  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Ward.- — And  you  bought  it  from  Mr.  Van  San  or  through 
Van  San  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Through  Van  San. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr.  Van  San  was  then  a  member  of  this  company 
and  one  of  its  directors  ? 

Mr.  Doyle.—  Yes,  sir. 


586 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  that  at  the  same  time  lie  was  engaged  as  selling 
agent  for  the  cooperative  creameries,  farmers'  creamery  company 
on  a  commission,  he  was  selling  it  to  his  own  company. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  I  should  think  he  could  not  give  good  service 
either  to  the  cooperative  dairy  farmers  or  to  his  company  in  which 
he  was  a  large  stockholder.  That  is,  I  should  think  his  interests 
would  have  conflicted.  I  understand  it  is  the  policy  of  the  State, 
through  the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets,  to  prevent  a  man  from 
being  both  a  buyer  and  seller  at  the  same  time.  Did  you  under- 
stand it  that  way  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No,  sir;  I  didn't  know  there  was  any  objection 
there.  In  fact,  I  would  not  see  any  harm  in  doing  it  that  way. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr.  Van  San  appears  to  have  been  connected  with 
the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  here;  you  knew  that,  didn't 
you? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  I  knew  he  was  connected,  but  in  what  capacity  I 
did  not  know. 

Mr.  Ward. — So  that  when  he  was  selling  milk  for  the  dairymen 
through  the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets,  at  the  same  time  he  was 
a  stockholder  and  director  in  and  selling  it  to  his  own  company. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  think  there  is  nothing  immoral  in  that  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Immoral  ?  No,  I  would  not  think  so.  The  milk 
that  Van  'San  sold  us  we  endeavored  to  sell  at  a  profit ;  we  had  to 
stay  in  business.  Mr.  Van  San  as  a  stockholder  participated  in 
that  profit. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  he  got  two  profits.  He  got  one  profit  out  of  the 
milk  by  way  of  earnings  of  your  company,  and  another  profit  out  of 
the  commissions  paid  to  him  as  an.  agent  of  the  farmers  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  I  suppose  so. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  should  think  he  could  have  gone  as  agent  for  the 
dairymen  to  the  same  companies  which  you  sold  to  and  sold  them 
milk  at  the  same  price  that  you  did  and  thereby  get  a  better  price 
for  the  farmers  who  employed  him. 


587 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Well,  I  suppose  lie  could.  Yes,  sir ;  I  suppose  he 
could.  He  turned  over  to  us  tliree  or  four  customers  that  were 
securing  milk  and  cream  from  him  and  for  that  we  gave  him  $500 
in  our  stock.  All  the  stations  that  he  was  acting  for  were  coopera- 
tive companies,  except  one,  the  Chemung  Dairy  Products  Com- 
pany, at  Big  Flats.  The  'business  he  turned  over  to  us  was  the 
Malone  Dairy  Company,  Clover  Farms  and  Locust  Farms  Com- 
pany. There  may  have  been  one  or  two  more.  I  don't  know 
exactly  what  trade  he  kept.  These  were  his  regular  shipping 
customers  the  year  round.  We  had  sold  cream  to  the  Malone 
Dairy  Company  before. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Do  you  think  that  the  cooperative  dairymen  knew 
that  they  had  been  turned  over,  that  their  business  had  been  turned 
over  to  another  middleman  by  Mr.  Van  'San  for  stock  in  your 
company  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No ;  I  don't  know  whether  that  good-will  really 
belonged  to  the  dairymen's  companies  that  Mr.  Van  San  operated 
for.  I  knew  he  was  selling  on  commission  at  one  place.  I  know 
Mr.  Van  San  is  agent  for  creameries,  but  how  he  got  it,  I  don't 
know.  I  know  he  has  done  some  work  for  Dillon  and  goes  to  his 
office  occasionally. 

Mr.  Ward. —  If  he  had  been  paid  by  the  up-State  dairy  com- 
panies to  build  up  a  business  and  secure  a  good-will  for  their 
product  and  then  he  sells  that  good-will  to  a  company  in  which 
he  is  interested  and  sells  the  product  too,  to  a  company  in  which  he 
is  interested,  that  would  be  immoral  you  would  say,  would  it  not  ? 
That  is,  say  you  hired  me  to  go  up  in  the  upper  part  of  the  city  and 
get  you  a  customer  and  I  get  two  or  three  customers  and  you  pay 
me  for  my  work  and  I  go  'and  sell  those  customers  to  the  Sheffield 
Farms,  wouldn't  you  say  I  was  acting  immorally  towards  you  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Well,  there  are  two  ways  to  look  at  that.  In  my 
judgment,  it  would  not  be  immoral.  We  are  still  buying  through 
Van  San.  We  have  our  own  creameries  now,  one  at  Millers  Mills, 
"N.  Y.  We  bought  it  out  of  our  own  cash  last  April.  We  opened 
it  in  July;  we  paid  about  $1,200  or  $1,500  for  the  site  and  then 
had  it  fixed  up.  We  have  another  at  Rice's,  K  Y.,  on  the  R  W.  & 
0.  We  bought  that  with  the  business  we  purchased  last  August  from 


588 

Tutting  &  Hines,  Incorporated.  We  paid  $17,000  for  that  busi- 
ness. We  paid  $12,000  in  cash  and  $5,000  in  notes.  We  got  that 
$12,000  out  of  the  profits  of  our  business,  and  from  the  $8,000 
worth  of  new  stock  we  took.  We  sold  the  Harford  Mills  plant  in 
September  of  this  year  and  the  North  Spencer  plant  for  $4,000 
to  the  R.  F.  'Stevens  Company.  They  paid  cash.  We  lease  other 
plants,  one  at  St.  Johnsville,  one  at  Newport,  one  at  Stone  Road. 
The  last  three  are  all  cooperative  plants  built  by  the  farmers.  We 
negotiated  those  leases  for  our  company  through  Mr.  Van  San. 
At  St.  Johnsville  and  Newport,  we  paid  a  rent  of  $100  a  month ; 
at  Richfield  Junction  we  don't  pay  any  rent,  but  we  had  an  under- 
standing that  we  would  fix  up  the  creamery.  Mr.  Van  San  was  the 
man  who  negotiated  with  the  dairymen,  to  lease  those  plants  to  our 
company.  He  was  our  representative  at  St.  Johnsville  in  March, 
1916,  at  Newport  in  September.,  and  at  'Stone  Road,  Richfield 
Junction,  in  either  June  or  July.  The  only  trouble  at  the  Rich- 
field plant  was  the  August  patrons  expected  the  full  Dairymen's 
League  price  and  we  had  a  contract  below  that  price  until  March 
31,  1917.  That  was  the  contract  Van  San  had  negotiated.  We  had 
spent  $6,000  in  machinery  and  construction  at  that  plant ;  that  was 
our  rent,  and  that  was  the  reason  milk  was  sold  to  us  at  a  price 
so  we  could  make  up  for  what  we  spent  on  the  station,  but  we 
agreed  to  pay  a  price  over  and  above  the  contract  price  verbally 
to  outsiders.  We  never  started  to  operate  the  Stone  Road  plant ; 
we  are  fixing  it  up  now.  We  get  milk  from  New  Berlin.  We  pur- 
chased that  through  Van  San.  That  is  a  cooperative  plant.  Mr. 
Van  Stan  sold  us  that  in  1915.  At  that  time  he  was  a  stockholder 
in  our  company.  He  was  then  acting  as  agent  either  for  the 
Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  or  the  Dairymen's  League ;  I  don't 
known  which.  We  also  got  milk  from  Baldwinsville  through  Van 
San.  Those  are  the  only  places.  Mr.  Van  San  put  in  $3,200  and 
drew  out  $6,000  within  a  year. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  during  that  time  he  turned  this  Dairymen's 
League  milk  or  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets1  milk  over  to  your 
company  largely  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Whatever  we  needed  of  it. 

Mr.  Ward.— Well,  he  made  $2,500  then,  apparently. 


589 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  sir.  We  paid  a  dividend  of  6  per  cent  and 
Van  San  got  6  per  cent  on  his  stock. 

Mr.  Ward.—  I  don't  see  why  he  was  entitled  to  that  $2,500  for 
any  reason  except  that  he  turned  over  this  cooperative  milk  into 
your  hands  at  a  price. 

Mr.  Doyle  —  He  got  it  because  the  others  got  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  might  look  like  a  way  to  cover  up  a  pp.vinent 
of  $2,500-  in  cash  for  turning  over  to  you  this  cooperative  milk  at 
a  price. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  That  was  not  the  intention. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  result  would  be  the  same  as  if  it  had  beer  the 
intention. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  the  result  is  the  same.  We  are  now  getting 
about  25  cans  a  day  from  Little  Falls  that  comes  to  us.  We  have 
sold  10  or  15  cans  to  the  Locust  Farms.  Van  San  sells  some  of  it 
to  us  and  some  to  Locust  Farms.  During  1915,  we  regularly  sold 
a  quantity  of  milk  to  small  milk  dealers.  We  sold  to  A.  Piper,  202 
E.  36th  street;  M.  Mercy,  522  Second  avenue;  A.  Bloch,  155  East 
Tth  street,  and  others.  Their  requirements  average  about  40  or  50 
cans  a  day.  Mr.  Van  San  arranged  for  the  leases  from  which  we 
got  that  milk.  Of  course,  we  made  a  profit  on  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  you  think  it  is  not  possible  from  yours  and 
Mr.  Van  iSan's  experience,  you  would  say  it  was  not  convenient  for 
a  cooperative  dairyman  to  bring  their  milk  and  sell  it  direct  to  the 
men  who  needed  it  to  distribute  it  in  New  York,  that  there  had 
better  be  a  middleman  in  the  way  of  a  broker  like  Van  S'an  and 
yourself  between  the  user  and  the  cooperative  station  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  You  mean,  in  my  judgment  ? 

Mr.  Ward.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No,  I  would  not  think  it  necessary. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  you  thought  it  necessary  in  your  case  and 
so  did  Van  San  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Well,  for  the  convenience  and  benefit  of  the  co- 
operative farmers.  Today  our  assets  are  around  $65,000  to  $70,- 
000.  Our  liabilities  are  about  $55,000  counting  our  capital  stock. 


590 

We  owe  $9,000  and  current  accounts  for  milk  to  the  producers,  but 
we  never  owe  them  for  more  than  two  weeks'  milk.  We  still  pay 
Van  :San  a  salary  of  $50  a  week.  I  draw  $50  a  week.  Van  San 
got  this  salary  of  $50'  a  week  in  addition  to  the  $2,500.  McKay 
draws  a  salary  of  $50  a  week;  Mr.  Richmond  draws  $10  a  week; 
he  was  not  active  in  the  business,  and  the  others  were.  I  don't 
know  why  Van  San  left  us.  I  have  never  figured  our  gross  profits. 
I  don't  think  the  farmers  who  employed  Van  San  were  entitled  to 
the  $2,500  and  $50  a  week  that  he  got  from  us.  It  is  entirely 
different  whether  you  are  merchandizing  products  or  representing 
one  as  an  attorney.  That  is  a  different  proposition.  I  wouldn't 
want  an  attorney  to  do  just  that  way,  but  an  attorney  is  not  selling 
anything.  I  don't  know  that  Van  San  is  selling  his  skill  to  those 
cooperative  companies,  his  skill  as  a  salesman.  I  don't  think  the 
farmers  ought  to  have  gotten  the  $2,500'  and  the  $50  a  week  that 
Van  iSan  received,  even  if  they  did  pay  him.  We  pay  a  better  price 
to  the  farmers,  but  we  pay  still  more  to  Van  S'an. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is  the  grievance.  You  see  the  question  is  not 
"  Do  we  get  more,  but  did  we  get  all  that  a  good  agent  might  have 
gotten  us  ?" 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes,  I  think  Van  San  got  fully  as  much.  Why 
should  he  give  the  $2,500  to  the  farmers  ?  The  farmers  might  have 
been  happy;  I  will  grant  you  that.  I  wouldn't  call  our  stock 
watered  stock. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well  you  actually  had  in  $8,000  and  your  stock  is 
now  $20,300-  that  would  leave  $12,300  water,  and  that  is  worth 
par  now,  you  figure. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  I  showed  you  where  we  put  in  $6,0-00  this  year 
alone. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  paid  $2,000  of  that  back  to  Van  San  though, 
together  with  some  more,  and  I  have  taken  that  $6,000  out  which 
leaves  $8,000  in  cash,  so  that  makes  $12,300  which  was  originally 
watered.  Is  that  the  way  most  of  the  milk  companies  are  capital- 
ized and  incorporated  in  the  city  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  I  don't  know  anything  about  anybody  else.  I 
don't  care  to  make  our  wholesale  prices  public. 


591 

COMPETITION 

Mr.  Ward. —  Do  you  find  that  you  have  got  to  go  up  against 
other  dealers  trying  to  sell  to  the  same  customer  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Yes.  The  competition  is  very  sharp.  We  don't 
agree  among  ourselves  not  to  compete  in  selling.  I  do  not  believe 
in  that,  never  did.  As  far  as  I  am  concerned  or  our  company,  the 
dealers  down  here  have  no  agreement  as  to  what  price  we  will  sell 
at. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  we  have  heard  the  rumor  that  all  of  it  waa 
under  an  agreement  combined. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  In  reference  to  prices  ? 

Mr.  Ward. —  Yes.    So  that  you  do  not  compete  with  each  other. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No,  that  is  not  the  condition.    That  is  not  true. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  Mr.  Van  'San's  Bureau  announces  there  is  no 
competition  here  in  selling  milk. 

Mr.  Doyle. —  Mr.  Van  San's  Bureau  says  that  ? 

Mr.  Ward. —  Yes,  that  is  what  they  tell  us  upjState  and  he  is  a 
stockholder  and  director  of  your  company.  Isn't  that  true,  our 
story  that  our  people  get  up-State,  that  you  are  combined  here  and 
don't  cut  prices  or  compete  ? 

Mr.  Doyle.—  No. 

Mr.  Ward.—  That  is  not  true  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  No. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Who  do  you  suppose  started  that  story  ? 

Mr  .Doyle. —  I  don't  know;  there  are  a  good  many  stories 
started. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  have  not  found  that  true  ? 
Mr.  Doyle.—  No. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr.  Van  'San  has  not  convinced  you  that  that  is 
the  situation  ? 

Mr.  Doyle. —  That  is  not  the  situation.  We  sold  the  Sheffield 
Farms  25  cans  of  cream  last  month,  and  many  other  dealers. 


592 

THE  OTHER  MIDDLEMAN 
Mr.  N.  A.  VAN  SAN,  being  duly  sworn,  testified : 

"  I  live  at  No.  1253  Garden  street,  Hoboken.  I  am  a  milk  agent 
for  farmers'  creameries  and  have  been  for  three  years. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  farmers'  creameries  have  you  been  milk 
agent  for  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Hamden,  Andes,  Little  Falls,  Kelly  Corners. 
Mr.  Ward. —  What  do  you  do  with  the  milk  that  they  have  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Sell  it  in  New  York  'City.  I  began  to  act  as 
agent  for  farmers'  creameries  about  1913  and  have  been  in  that 
business  ever  since.  I  sell  this  milk  and  cream  mostly  to  whole- 
salers,—  Locust  Farms,  Malone  Dairy,  Johnson  Dairy,  Camisa 
Brothers,  Holstein  Dairy  'Company,  and  others.  I  have  been  sell- 
ing some  to  the  Modern  Dairy  Company  and  to  the  Locust  Farms, 
to  the  Malone  Dairy  Company,  and  did  all  through  1915. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr.  Doyle  says  that  they  paid  $500  to  you  for  the 
good-will  of  the  business  of  the  Malone  Dairy  Company  and  Locust 
Farms. 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No.  When  I  didn't  have  enough  surplus  for 
the  creamery,  the  Modern  Dairy  'Company  had  their  own 
creameries. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Is  that  true  what  Mr  .Doyle  testified,  they  paid 
you  in  1916,  in  the  spring,  $500  for  the  good-will  of  your  business 
with  the  Locust  Farms  and  Malone  Dairy  Company  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir,  for  their  surplus. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  you  took  $2,000  stock  in  their  company  ? 

Mr.  Van  San.—  No,  I  bought  stock  from  another  partner  who 
went  out,  Mr.  Doyle's  brother.  I  took  that  over  to  help  the  concern 
out.  I  paid  $1,000. 

Mr.  Ward. — At  the  end  the  year  Mr.  Doyle  said  you  had  $6,000 
in  stock. 

Mr.  Van  San. — •  Well,  with  the  cash  capitalized  new,  it  made 
the  capital  bigger.  I  paid  $2,000  in  at  one  time  and  they  gave  me 
$500  for  good-will  from  those  customers  that  I  mentioned  before. 


593 

I  put  in  $3,200  in  cash  and  drew  out  $6,000.  I  was  in  a  year.  I 
got  $50  a  week  during  that  year  from  them  for  expenses,  after 
their  farmers.  I  visited  the  creameries.  They  had  creameries  up 
the  State  and  I  looked  after  them,  the  same  as  I  do  the  farmers7 
creameries. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Mr.  Doyle  said  it  was  salary. 

Mr.  Van  'San. —  He  can  call  it  salary  because  I  did  not  charge 
expenses  up. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  you  sell  some  milk  to  the  Modern  Dairy  Com- 
pany while  you  were  working  for  them  at  $50  a  week  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir;  I  did;  when  I  was  short  I  sold  milk 
to  the  'Sheffield  Farms  and  Malone  Dairy  Company ;  I  didn't  fix 
the  price ;  I  have  so  much  milk  if  a  man  can  sell  it,  to  sell  it.  The 
Modem  Dairy  Company  gave  me  the  price  they  wanted  for  it. 
I  was  a  director  of  the  Hamden  Creamery  Company ;  I  was  living 
in  Hamden. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Were  you  connected  with  the  Bureau  of  Foods 
and  Markets? 

Mr.  Van  San.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  In  what  way  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Oh,  what  way  ?    I  am  special  inspector. 

Mr.  Ward. —  -Special  inspector  of  what  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Well,  for  investigation,  milk  investigation. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  farmers'  dairy  company  pays  you  commis- 
sion? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Sure. 

Mr.  Ward.—  To  sell  their  milk  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir ;  sure. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  got  paid  in  the  Modern  Dairy  Company 
$50-  a  week  to  sell  their  milk  to  them  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  did  sell  the  farmers'  milk,  some  of  it  to 
the  Modern  Dairy  ? 


594 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir.  I  made  the  lease  for  the  St.  Johns- 
ville  farmers  dairy  with  the  Modern  Dairy  Company  when  I  was 
interested  in  the  Modern  Dairy  Company.  I  was  the  treasurer. 

1  was  not  acting  for  the  farmers  then.     The  same  is  true  at  New- 
port. 

Mr.  Ward. —  In  Little  Falls,  you  were  acting  for  the  farmers  ? 
Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  got  a  commission  for  selling  their  milk  ? 
Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir  . 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  sold  some  of  it  to  the  Modern  Dairy  Com- 
pany? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Maybe  some. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Why  weren't  your  dairymen  that  you  were  work- 
ing for  up-State  entitled  to  the  $50  a  week  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  am  not  working  for  any  dairymen.  I  have 
nothing  to  do  with  St.  Johnsville  or  Newport  at  all.  These  sales 
were  made  to  the  Modern  Dairy  Company.  The  Andes  Dairy 
Company's  milk  goes  to  the  Modern  Dairy;  we  sold  it  and  the 
Modern  Dairy  Company  paid  the  Andes'  Creamery.  The  Andes 
Creamery  Company  pays  me  1  per  cent ;  the  Little  Falls  pays  me 

2  per  cent. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  long  have  you  been  connected  as  special  in- 
spector of  milk,  etc.,  with  the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  When  it  opened,  I  think ;  I  have  known  Mr. 
Dillon  eighteen  years. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Have  you  been  connected  with  the  Bureau  ever 
since  it  was  organized  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  with  the  market  end  of  it  ? 

Mr.  Van  'San. —  Yes,  sir  . 

Mr.  Ward. — And  advising  and  helping  the  farmers  and  Mr. 
Dillon? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 


595 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  sell  any 
milk  through  anybody  'besides  you  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir;  they  are  not  in  the  milk  business  sell- 
ing agent. 

Mr.  Ward. —  'So  all  the  milk  that  they  ever  claimed  to  have  sold, 
you  are  the  man  who  sold  it  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir ;  I  sold  it.  I  went  in  as  a  stockholder 
of  the  Modern  Dairy  Company  to  protect  myself.  I  was  selling 
those  fellows  quite  some  stuff,  and  I  wanted  to  know;  what  was 
going  on,  if  I  get  the  pay  for  it.  $50  a  week  isn't  so  much.  You 
travel,  you  know  what  that  costs  on  the  railroad.  I  say  I  did  spend 
money  traveling  on  their  business.  I  am  doing  the  same  thing 
today.  I  still  get  the  same  salary  of  $50  a  week,  although  I  am  not 
a  stockholder ;  I  am  still  continuing  on.  a  salary.  There  is  no  other 
milk  company  here  paying  me  a  salary. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  understand  milk  is  very  scarce  now. 
Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 
Mr.  Ward. —  And  very  high  ? 
Mr.  Van  'San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  got  these  contracts  last  fall  for  the  Modern 
Dairy  Company  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  From  cooperative  companies  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir.  I  got  those  contracts  last  Spring  for 
the  year.  I  got  the  Barnegat  'Creamery  after  Malone.  They  pay 
me  2  per  cent  commission.  The  Malone  Dairy  Company  pays 
nothing,  no  expenses  and  no  salary.  I  don.'t  own  the  Little  Falls 
milk.  I  am  an  agent  and  understand  I  have  to  sell  the  whole  out- 
put. Any  milk  Doyle  gets  from  Little  Falls  his  company  bought 
from  me.  The  $50  a  week  he  paid  me  had  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  made  a  profit  on  it  more  than  the  Little  Falls 
people  received. 

Mr.  Van,  San.—  Who? 
Mr.  Ward.—  You. 


590 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  were  a  stockholder  in  the  Modern  Dairy  Com- 
pany. 

Mr.  Van  San. —  That  is  all  right ;  that  has  nothing  to  do  with. 
the  Little  Falls  milk,  if  I  am  a  stockholder  in  that  company ;  I  can 
be  a  stockholder  in  many  companies.  If  I  should  invest  some 
money,  I  do. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Is  it  true  that  they  gave  you  $500  of  their  stock 
for  a  part  of  the  good-will  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  told  you  before  that  is  true. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Is  it  true  that  you  put  in  $3,200  for  a  year  and 
drew  out  $6,000  ? 

Mr.  Van  'San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.—  That  gave  you  $2,800  profit  besides  the  $50  a 


Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  were  the  only  one  connected  with  the  Depart- 
ment of  Foods  and  Markets  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  am  not  connected  with  the  Bureau  of  Foods 
and  Markets. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  thought  you  told  me  you  were  when  you  sat 
down  here,  a  special  milk  inspector. 

Mr.  Van  !S'an. —  Well,  when  there  is  any  trouble  in  the  country 
in  the  creamery  they  write  and  Mr.  Dillon  asks  me  to  go  up  there. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  you  do  go  up  representing  the  Bureau  of  Foods 
and  Markets  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  don't  go  up  there  representing  the  Modern 
Dairy  Company? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Or  any  dairy  company  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir. 


597 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  bought  that  stock  to  make  some  money,  didn't 
you? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir ;  I  did  it  to  help  that  company. 
Mr.  Ward. —  Why  didn't  you  keep  it  then  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  don't  want  to  keep  it,  because  I  sold  out.  Mr. 
Richmond  wanted  to  buy  it.  I  still  take  care  of  their  business 
when  in  the  country  and  they  pay  me  $50  a  week.  When  the 
Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  sends  me  up  to  help  the  dairymen, 
nobody  pays  my  expenses ;  I  pay  my  own  expenses ;  the  dairymen 
don't  pay ;  I  am  no  philanthropist ;  but  I  am  most  of  the  time  in 
the  country ;  I  have  to  go  in  that  section  any  way.  If  I  am  needed 
in  St.  Lawrence  County,  I  go  to  St.  Lawrence  -County.  I  am 
interested  in  a  creamery  there  at  Fort  Covington  near  Malone. 
I  buy  the  milk  straight  out  and  sell  it  here  since  the  1st  of  Decem- 
ber. Now  I  am  jobbing  milk  on  my  own  account. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Have  you  got  any  creamery  in  Chautauqua 
County? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  If  you  had  to  go  up  there  for  the  Bureau  of  Foods 
and  Markets,  who  would  pay  your  expenses  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Nobody. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  would  still  go  free  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Somebody  has  to  pay  for  that  ultimately. 

Mr.  Van  San. —  You  have  got  to  do  some  favors  in  the  world. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  it  has  been  fairly  profitable,  hasn't  it,  this 
working  for  nothing  for  the  farmers  ? 

Mr.  Van  S'an. —  I  am  not  working  for  nothing  when  I  get  2  per 
cent  commission ;  I  don't  call  that  working  for  nothing. 

Mr.  Ward.  —  Well,  you  go  then  with  the  idea  of  making  a  con- 
tract with  them  to  take  care  of  their  milk  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  When  they  want  me,  yes,  sir.  That  is  the  real 
object.  That  is  the  only  time  I  pay  my  expense®.  The  Depart- 
ment has  never  paid  a  cent  of  expenses.  I  pay  my  own  expenses 


598 

because  it  may  help  me  to  get  new  business.  I  am  not  a  jobber  of 
milk.  I  buy  the  Fort  Covington  milk  and  have  them  ship  it  in  my 
name  because  those  people  were  never  in  the  New  York  market. 
I  buy  it  at  a  certain  price  and  sell  it  again  to  the  Sheffield  Farms. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  much  do  you  get  for  it  ? 

Mr.  Van  'San. —  Well,  that  is  different. 

Mr.  Ward. —  In  December  how  much  did  you  pay  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  buy  on  butter  fat  basis.  Good  milk  costs  us 
$2.42,  I  think.  I  am  selling  it  at  an  advance  of  5  cents  per  hun- 
dred pounds  to  the  'Sheffield  Farms.  You  can  call  it  as  commission, 
yes,  sir.  The  farmers  were  not  afraid  to  sell  it  to  Sheffield  Farms. 
I  went  up  there  and  bought  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  you  were  an  extra  middleman  between  the 
Sheffield  Farms  and  the  dairymen  ? 

Mr.  Van  S'an. —  Oh,  to  Sheffield ;  yes,  sir.  I  am  an  extra  mid- 
dleman between  Sheffield  Farms  and  the  dairyman  and  get 
five  cents  a  hundred  pounds.  I  am  not  really  a  commission  man 
because  I  am  responsible  for  all  of  the  milk  the  farmers  ship  in. 
If  the  bills  weren't  paid,  I  have  to  pay  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  understand  that  the  Bureau  ^of  Foodsi  land 
Markets  that  you  are  working  for  at  times,  has  for  one  of  its  prin- 
cipal objects  the  elimination  of  unnecessary  middlemen  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  It  hasn't  worked  out  in  this  case.  But  the  Bureau 
of  Foods  and  Markets  has  been  instrumental  in  creating  one  or 
two  additional  middlemen. 

Mr.  Van  S'an. —  I  don't  think  a  farmer  can  afford  to  come  here 
every  week  and  collect  and  sell  the  surplus  milk.  I  think  it  would 
cost  him  more  than  2  per  cent. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Every  man  who  sells  milk  to  Sheffield  Farms  does 
not  need  to  come  here  and  ask  for  his  money  or  to  collect  his  money. 

Mr.  Van  San. —  There  are  several  creameries.  Everybody  can- 
not sell  to  Sheffield  and  when  'Sheffield  buys  here  he  don't  buy  of 
everybody  generally. 


599 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  is  what  every  middleman  down  on  the  street 
or  every  commission  man  says.  They  make  the  same  argument 
as  you.  They  say  every  creamery  cannot  come  here  and  sell  their 
product. 

Mr.  Van  San. —  You  know  they  cannot  do  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  They  say  the  Bureau  of  Foods  and  Markets  sell 
millions  of  pounds  of  milk  for  the  farmers.  Did  you  sell  all  that 
milk  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  I  sold  all  that  milk  and  I  get  a  salary  from  the 
Modern  Dairy  Company  and  commission  from  some  of  the  cream- 
eries. I  have  a  right  to  be  interested  in  any  milk  business  I  want. 
That  is  between  me  and  the  Modern  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  made  these  profits  as  a  stockholder  of  the 
Dairy  Company  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  WThile  you  were  selling  all  the  milk  the  Bureau 
of  Foods  and  Markets  talks  about  ? 

Mr.  Van  San. —  Yes,  sir. 

OWNERSHIP  AND  CONTROL  OF  GATHERING  STATIONS 

It  is  earnestly  contended  by  those  who  have  studied  the  question 
from  the  standpoint^  of  the  dairymen,  that  dairymen  are  ensured 
of  better  prices  for  their  product  by  the  ownership  and  control  of 
the  milk  gathering  and  pasteurizing  plant.  The  experience  of 
cooperative  stations  during  the  past  year  seems  to  demonstrate 
that  claim.  It  may  further  be  said  that  the  auditor's  report  made 
to  this  Committee  from  the  books  and  records  of  certain  distribu- 
tors, established  the  proposition  that  market  milk  can  be  handled, 
clarified,  pasteurized  and  bottled  at  the  country  station  at  a  lower 
cost  than  the  same  work  can  be  done  in  the  city  plant.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  milk  distributor  asserts  that  the  business  of  the 
large  distributing  companies  cannot  be  successfully  handled 
through  the  operation  of  a  large  number  of  small  country  plants. 
They  contend  that  the  operation  of  two  or  three  country  plants, 
where  a  less  cost  for  pasteurization,  etc.,  is  shown,  does  not  afford 
a  just  basis  of  comparison  as  to  what  the  costs  would  be  if  all  the 


600 

business  of  the  large  companies  was  attempted  to  be  handled  in 
that  way.  The  testimony  of  the  larger  distributors  is  to  the  effect 
that  it  would  be  impractical  and  impossible  to  carry  on  their  busi- 
ness satisfactorily  by  buying  their  daily  supply  throughout  the 
year  from  a  great  number  of  cooperative  plants  managed  and  con- 
ducted by  the  dairymen,  because  of  the  fluctuating  and  varying 
needs  of  the  business  and  the  uncertainty  of  the  supply  at  different 
seasons  from  various  country  stations  so  controlled.  In  other 
words,  their  contention  is  that  if  all  the  milk  now  handled  at  the 
central  city  plants  was  attempted  to  be  handled  by  them  in  their 
own  plants  at  the  shipping  point,  it  would  require  great  duplication 
of  apparatus  and  labor  at  many  points.  At  some  seasons,  this  appa- 
ratus and  labor  would  be  idle ;  at  others  it  would  be  overburdened ; 
and  that  in  considering  the  entire  volume  of  business,  it  is  far  more 
economical  to  gather  the  milk  at  the  central  city  plant  in  the 
required  amounts  and  prepare  it  for  market  as  a  whole  for  a  day's 
supply,  instead  of  attempting  to  accumulate  or  prepare  from  many 
various  sections.  It  is  urged  further  that  the  requirements  of  the 
Health  Board  are  intended  to  provide  for  the  pasteurization  of  the 
milk  as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  hour  of  delivery. 

The  evidence  offered  before  the  Committee  as  to  the  ac- 
tion and  requirements  of  the  Board  of  Health  justify  the 
conclusion  that  it  is  the  purpose  of  the  Health  Department 
to  require  pasteurization  within  a  reasonably  short  time 
before  delivery,  and  that  such  pasteurization  is  the  more 
effectual  and  produces  a  more  sanitary  product  for  the  con- 
sumer. Obviously,  this  result  can  only  be  reached  by  pas- 
teurizing the  day's  supply  after  it  is  assembled  at  the  point  of 
distribution  in  the  city.  If  the  pasteurizing  is  to  be  done  at  the 
country  plant,  it  is  obvious  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  deliver  the 
milk  to  the  consumer  much  under  twenty-four  hours  after  pasteur- 
ization. It  is  doubtful  if  this  result  will  satisfy  the  advocates  of 
general  pasteurization.  On.  the  other  hand,  the  dairyman  claims 
that  he  is  much  more  advantageously  situated  with  his  own  station 
than  he  is  with  the  station  owned  and  controlled  by  the  milk  com- 
pany. A  solution  of  the  more  important  dispute  suggests  itself  in 
lihat  the  ownership  of  the  collecting  or  shipping  station  by  the  dairy- 
man does  not  necessarily  involve  pasteurizing. 


601 

If  the  milk  is  to  reach  the  market  independent  of  the 
large  distributor  equipped  with  pasteurizing  facilities,  the 
pasteurizing  apparatus  is  necessary  in  the  dairymen's  coun- 
try stations,  but  if  it  is  to  go  into  the  hands  of  distribu- 
tors who  have  central  pasteurizing  plants,  pasteurizing  equip- 
ment is  unnecessary  or  need  not  be  used.  In  examining  the 
method  of  operation  of  cooperative  stations  and  the  results 
achieved,  it  is  easily  observable  that  the  cooperative  companies  own- 
ing their  own  stations  have  received  some  slight  advantage  in  milk 
prices,  such  as  appears  to  a  small  extent  in  the  Lowville  Cooperative 
Company,  whose  plan  has  been  before  set  out  in  this  report.  The 
Committee  has  been  unable  to  find  evidence  during  the  year  1915 
of  any  considerably  greater  advantage  secured  than  the  investment 
in  the  dairyman's  station  demanded.  It  should  be  remembered 
in  considering  these  prices  that  the  milk  dealer  or  lessee  had  in 
the  great  majority  of  cases,  no  capital  investment  and  up  to  1916 
paid  only  nominal  rent.  The  -capital  investment  in  the  cooperative 
station  must  be  taken  seriously  into  account.  In  many  cases, 
however,  it  was  disclosed  that  the  stock  of  cooperative  companies 
through  a  small  dumpage  charge  had  earned  substantial  dividends 
and  in.  some  cases  had  doubled  in  value.  The  milk  distributing 
company  which  owns  its  own  stations  and  thus  controls  the  source 
of  supply,  from  its  business  standpoint  is  much  more  securely 
situated  than  one  dependent  upon  stations  owned  and  controlled 
by  dairymen.  This  naturally  results  in  the  desire  and  disposition 
of  the  milk  distributing  companies  to  own  and  control  the  collecting 
stations.  Their  aim  and  purpose  has  been  stated  to  be  the  control 
of  milk  at  the  earliest  possible  moment.  They  contend  that  this 
best  allows  them  to  provide  for  its  sanitary  condition  and  for  a 
nearly  uniform  supply. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  would  seem  to  be  obvious  that  the 
dairymen  should  have  an  assembling  station,  owned  and  con- 
trolled by  themselves,  in  which  their  product  could  be  as- 
sembled, handled  and  made  ready  for  the  market.  A  careful 
consideration  of  the  reasons  advanced  by  the  distributors  as  to  the 
necessity  of  the  ownership  of  the  ordinary  shipping  station  does 
not  overcome  the  apparent  advantage  to  the  dairyman  in  the 
operation  of  his  own  assembling  and  shipping  station.  However,  it 


602 

must  foe  borne  in  mind  that  these  suggestions  apply  largely  to  the 
country  shipping  station  engaged  in  collecting  and  forwarding  to 
the  city  market,  day  by  day,  the  normal  quantity,  and  in  the  seasons 
of  surplus,  possibly  manufacturing  butter  and  cheese.  They  do 
not  apply  to  manufacturing  plants  requiring  an  investment  of 
$50,000  or  $100,000,  and  possibly  much  more.  With  the  increased 
demand  for  market  milk,  these  large  manufacturing  plants  supply 
at  certain  seasons,  the  city  market.  At  other  times  they  are  largely 
engaged  in.  the  manufacture  of  other  products.  They  are  of  direct 
benefit  to  the  dairymen  and  to  the  (State  as  a  whole.  It  is  doubtful 
if  cooperative  agencies  can  find  the  capital,  the  skill  and  cohesion 
to  carry  on  such  industries  for  many  years  to  come.  If  the  dairy- 
man is  securing  from  the  milk  distributor  a  fair  return  for  the 
market  milk  produced  by  him,  this  question  will  probably  dis- 
appear. 

One  other  proposition  suggests  itself  in  relation  to  this 
matter.  In  times  when  market  milk  is  high  and  sought  after, 
the  co-operative  station  will  be  able  to  show  a  handsome  profit  and 
easily  find  a  favorable  market,  but  if  for  any  reason,  the  purchasing 
power  of  the  people  is  greatly  reduced  and  the  attendant  large 
consumption  of  all  kinds  of  food  products,  including  milk,  is  re- 
duced, it  will  be  exceedingly  difficult  for  the  cooperative  company 
to  find  a  market.  The  distributing  company  is  then  well  supplied 
with  milk  from  its  own  stations.  The  jobber,  who  perhaps  has  been 
serviceable  for  a  time  to  the  co-operative  company,  will  find  it 
difficult  to  sell. at  a  satisfactory  price.  The  patron  of  the  cooper- 
ative station  is  then  at  a  disadvantage  to  the  patron  of  the  dis- 
tributing company  who  is  assured  of  such  market  as  exists. 

This  review  of  the  testimony  is  attempted  not  as  being  decisive 
of  the  problems  involved,  but  as  a  presentation  of  the  various  argu- 
ments advanced.  They  should  be  considered  seriously  by  dairymen 
in  making  their  initial  investment.  That  the  last  consideration 
referred  to  has  operated  during  certain  periods  in  the  State,  is 
abundantly  established  by  the  evidence  in  the  record.  Many  a 
cooperative  plant,  established  at  considerable  expense  and  with 
great  labor  by  dairymen,  easily  falls  into  the  hands  of  the  waiting 
distributor,  when  market  conditions  places  the  co-operative  plant 
at  a  disadvantage. 


603 

ACQUIRING  CONTROL  OF  THE  DAIRYMEN'S  STATION 

There  can  be  no  question  that  the  average  milk  distributing  com- 
pany desires  to  eliminate  from  its1  field  of  operation  both  the  cheese 
factory  and  the  cooperative  plant.  The  evidence  before  the  Com- 
mittee affords  many  examples  of  these  methods.  A  period  of 
depression  comes  with  attendant  small  returns  to  the  patron  of  the 
cooperative  factory.  He  quickly  becomes  disgusted  and  offers  his 
stock  to  the  first  taker.  One  or  two  active  men  in  the  company 
soon  absorb  a  controlling  interest.  This  is  easily  turned  over  to 
the  nearest  milk  company  at  a  profit.  Ill  luck  in  marketing  of 
product,  dissatisfaction  with  the  control ;  all  the  numerous  ills  and 
annoyances  that  occur  between  men,  operate  to  destroy  and  dissolve 
the  cooperative  endeavor.  Successful  cooperation  requires  stead- 
fast qualities  of  the  mind  and  heart,  which  must  be  carefully  cul- 
tivated in  order  to  survive,  but  it  is  difficult  to  write  such  qualifi- 
cations into  the  articles  of  incorporation  so  that  they  may 
effectively  control  the  action  of  all  the  members.  It  may  well  be 
said  that  the  successful  cooperative  management  of  marketing 
societies  requires  broadened  social  views  and  social  service  from 
the  men  engaged  in  managing  cooperative  enterprise.  To  create 
this  spirit  of  cooperation  and  service  in  the  State  is  one  of  the  most 
serviceable  of  governmental  activities. 

ANTAGONISM  BETWEEN  DAIRYMEN  AND  MILK  DISTRIBUTORS 

In  order  to  secure  personal  popularity,  certain  persons  strive 
to  convince  dairymen  that  an  antagonism  exists  between  them  and 
the  purchasers  of  their  product. 

This  is  not  so.  No  necessary  antagonism  exists  between  the 
dairymen  and  the  milk  distributing  company.  On  the  contrary, 
their  interests  are  mutual.  Instead  of  being  engaged  in  a  destruc- 
tive warfare,  the  one  upon  the  other,  they  are  each  necessarily 
engaged  in  promoting  the  other's  interest.  The  business  of  the 
milk  distributor  cannot  flourish  unless  the  producers,  among  whom 
his  capital  is  invested,  ultimately  flourish.  Also,  it  is  perfectly 
apparent  to  any  thinking  man,  that  the  dairyman  cannot  flourish 
except  when  the  business  of  distributing  his  product  is  profitable 
and  flourishing.  It  would  seem  unnecessary  to  make  any  comment 
upon  this  situation,  yet  from  time  to  time,  individuals  seeking 


604 

selfish  ends,  endeavor  to  create  in  the  public  mind  the  idea  that  the 
milk  distributor  is  necessarily  the  enemy  of  the  dairyman,  and  the 
dairyman  the  necessary  antagonist  of  the  milk  distributor.  Noth- 
ing could  be  further  from  the  facts.  Nothing  could  be  more  vicious 
or  detrimental  to  the  welfare  of  both.  That  the  dairyman  will 
endeavor  to  secure  from  the  distributor  the  best  possible  price  for 
his  product,  and  that  the  distributor  will  endeavor  to  buy  at  the 
lowest  price,  are  universal  business  laws,  but  the  bargain  being 
over,  there  is  absolutely  no  conflict  of  interests  between  them.  On 
the  contrary,  the  welfare  of  each  is  of  the  greatest  importance  to 
the  other. 

Therefore,  it  must  be  plain  that  any  attempt  to  trade 
upon,  or  secure  personal  popularity  or  strength  with  the  dairyman 
of  the  State  by  holding  out  to  him  the  milk  distributor  as  one  filled 
with  evil  machinations  towards  the  dairyman,  is  untruthful  and 
detrimental  to  the  interests  of  the  State  as  a  whole.  Many  millions 
of  dollars  of  capital  have  been  invested  in  structures  and  apparatus 
in  the  dairying  centers  of  the  'State ;  many  instrumentalities  have 
been  created  for  the  promotion  and  continuance  of  the  dairy  indus- 
try ;  many  improvements  have  been  brought  about  in  the  handling 
of  the  product,  and  remarkable  new  fields  of  business  enterprise 
have  been  developed,  all  of  which  has  tended  and  does  tend  to  the 
direct  benefit  of  the  dairy  industry  by  affording  new  output  for 
the  dairyman's  product,  It  may  well  be  said  that  these  activities 
of  capital  have  largely  created  the  present  shortage  in  the  milk 
supply  and  the  increasing  demand  for  the  product,  which  enables 
them  to  secure  the  present  current  prices.  This  being  so,  any  man 
or  set  of  men,  who  attempt  for  personal  reasons  to  put  into  the 
minds  of  the  dairymen  of  this  State,  the  idea  that  capital  invested 
in  these  enterprises  is  necessarily  antagonistic  to  their  interests,  is 
doing  an  evil  work. 

THE  MILK  TRUST 

There  is  no  milk  trust  controlling  the  purchase  and  sale  of 
market  milk  in  the  city  of  Buffalo.  There  is  none  in  Rochester ; 
there  is  none  in  Syracuse ;  there  is  none  in  Utica ;  there  is  none  in 
Albany;  nor  in  any  city  between  Albany  and  New  York,  nor  in 
any  town  or  village  of  the  State.  There  is  no  milk  trust  controlling 
the  purchase  and  sale  of  milk  in  the  city  of  New  York.  Instead 


605 

there  is  sharp  and  bitter  competition,  so  far  as  the  records 
of  this  Committee  discloses,  in  each  and  every  one  of  the  places. 
There  are  four  stations  in  many  places  where  one  could  collect  the 
milk.  There  are  four  outfits  of  station  managers  and  employees 
in  many  places  where  one  could  do  the  work.  Every  intelligent 
person  who  has  ever  discussed  the  question  concedes  that  there  are 
four  horses  and  wagons,  four  or  five  or  six  groups  of  solicitors ;  four 
or  five  or  six  separate  organizations  and  overhead  charges  duplicat- 
ing work  that  one  of  each  could  well  perform. 

There  is  too  much  capital  already  invested  in  the  business 
of  handling  and  distributing  market  milk  and  trying  to  pay, 
and  in  many  cases  successfully  paying,  dividends  upon  this 
capital.  Here,  then,  is  the  waste  and  the  loss,  because  all 
these  things  are  a  burden  upon  the  consumer  and  upon  the 
producer.  It  is  sometimes  asserted  that  the  field  is  not 
already  sufficiently  filled  with  this  unnecessary  service.  It  is 
sometimes  contended  that  the  cure  for  the  trouble  is  for  the  State 
to  endow  some  agency  with  a  sum  of  money  that  it  may  put  still 
another  outfit  in  the  field ;  that  the  State  shall  again,  duplicate  this 
service.  It  would  seem  hardly  necessary  to  refer  to  the  unsound- 
ness  of  such  views.  The  lack  of  a  just  understanding  of  the 
economic  problems  involved  are  too  plainly  indicated  in  statements 
of  this  nature  to  require  commen,t.  It  is  obvious  and  well  under- 
stood that  no  State  agency  can  economically  compete  with  indi- 
vidual enterprise.  Instead  of  introducing  more  expensive  com- 
petitors in  the  field  to  waste  more  money  of  the  consumer,  the  State 
should  endeavor  by  judicious  legislation,  to  permit  the  elimination 
of  all  unnecessary  investments  both  of  labor  and  capital  and 
effectively  control  the  business  operations  of  the  remainder. 

ATTEMPTS  TO  DISCREDIT  THE  QUALITY  OF  MILK  FURNISHED 

CONSUMERS 

There  goes  hand  in  hand  with  1Jhe  attempt  to  establish  a  feeling 
of  antagonism  between  the  dairymen  and  the  market  distributor, 
what  seems  to  be  an  attempt  to  discredit  the  quality  of  milk  fur- 
nished by  the  distributor  to  the  consumer  in  the  city  of  New  York. 
On  February  3,  1917,  a  New  York  newspaper  carried  a  headline 
reading  as  follows:  "  Ink  Diluted  Milk  'Sold  Bronx  Folks."  A. 


606 

few  days  previously  a  newspaper  carried  the  headline,  "  iSkim  Milk 
Sold  the  New  York  Consumer."  It  is  unnecessary  to  say  to  any 
person  acquainted  with  the  business  of  furnishing  milk  to  the  city 
of  New  York,  that  both  these  headlines  were  entirely  unjustifiable 
exaggerations  of  trifling  incidents,  or  untruthful  in  fact.  When 
this  Committee  visited  the  city  of  New  York,  it  was  furnished 
with  so-called  evidence  to  be  supplied  by  certain  discharged 
employees  of  milk  companies,  which,  after  careful  examination, 
was  found  to  consist  of  the  merest  trifles  or  gross  exaggerations  of 
daily  events  that  may  occasionally  happen  and  must  necessarily 
occur  in  the  management  of  any  large  concern.  The  ill  feeling 
evidenced  on  the  part  of  those  making  the  attacks  was  such  as  to 
satisfy  the  Committee  that  the  offered  evidence  was  untrustworthy. 
It  was  apparently  the  purpose  of  this  evidence  to  prejudice  the 
distribution  of  milk  in  the  city  of  New  York.  It  was  evident  that 
the  persons  offering  it  were  actuated  by  a  malicious  feeling.  It 
was,  and  is,  perfectly  evident  that  these  trifles  could  be  so  handled 
by  the  public  press  in  the  way  of  exaggeration  and  sensation  as  to 
materially  affect  the  consumption  of  milk. 

This  Committee  did  not  choose  to  "  bring  out "  such  testimony. 
First,  it  was  satisfied  that  it  was  largely  unimportant.  Second, 
it  was  satisfied  that  the  purposes  behind  it  were  malicious.  Third, 
it  was  satisfied  that  it  was  largely  untruthful  and  unfounded  on 
fact.  Fourth,  the  investigations  convinced  the  Committee  that  the 
consumer  in  the  city  of  New  York  was  actually  receiving  the  most 
sanitary  and  wholesome  milk  in  large  volume  that  any  city  ever 
received,  and  that  it  was  handled  with  the  care  and  attention  which 
such  products  did  not  receive  in  any  other  known  city.  This  being 
so,  it  was  perfectly  evident  that  the  Committee  would  go  outside 
of  its  purpose  to  do  a  service  to  the  S'tate  and  merely  make  itself 
the  tool  of  malicious  individuals,  if  it  lent  itself  to  these  unjusti- 
fied attacks.  It  was  evident  to  the  Committee  that  the  result  of 
such  activities  would  be  detrimental  to  the  dairymen  of  the  State 
in  cutting  down  consumption.  That  those  engaged  in  the  attempt 
to  discredit  the  quality  of  milk  furnished  to  the  consumers  in  New 
York  are,  however,  not  content,  is  evident  in  the  publications 
referred  to.  These  attempts  cannot  help  being  directly  in- 
jurious to  every  dairyman  in  the  State.  In  any  fair  view  of  the 


607 

subject,  they  are  untruthful  and  unreliable.  By  means  of  these 
activities,  the  inhabitants  of  cities  who  desire  to  use  milk  as  a  food 
are  influenced  not  to  do  so.  Being  unfounded,  they  accomplish 
nothing  except  to  gratify  the  malice  of  individuals,  yet  are  directly 
injurious  to  both  consumer  and  producer. 

It  is  evident  that  the  State  should  provide  itself  with  means  to 
protect  the  dairy  industry  from  maneuvers  of  this  sort.  Otherwise 
great  harm  may  result  from  such  a  propaganda.  It  is  always 
more  popular  to  make  sensational  attacks  than  to  recite  the 
plain  facts  of  an  industry.  The  food  supply  is  too  important  to 
be  used  as  an  instrument  to  gratify  malice  or  to  secure  popularity 
by  unjustifiable  attacks. 

MILK  BUYERS'  BONDING  ACT 

In  1913,  provision  was  made  to  the  end  that  the  operators  of 
milk  stations  or  collecting  stations  should  furnish  a  bond  through 
the  Department  of  Agriculture  of  the  'State  to  secure  dairymen  who 
should  deliver  milk  at  the  station.  This  act  has  failed  in  effectual 
enforcement.  The  enactment  of  this  law  was  induced  by  the  com- 
mon knowledge  that  dairymen  in  many  sections  of  the  (State  from 
time  to  time,  became  the  prey  of  men  without  financial  responsi- 
bility, who  could  secure  for  a  time,  possession  and  control  of  a 
shipping  station,  or  suffer  tremendous  losses  because  of  the  honest 
failure  of  men  engaged  in  business.  If  a  survey  could  be 
made  extending  back  fifteen  years,  it  would  probably  be  difficult 
to  find  a  county  in  the  State  where  the  dairymen  have  not  lost 
many  thousands  of  dollars  from  such  operations.  The  failure  to 
receive  any  pay  for  milk  produced  for  as  long  a  period  as  two  to 
three  months  has  been  very  frequent.  Such  a  result  is  a  disaster 
of  considerable  magnitude  to  the  ordinary  farming  community. 
The  loss  to  the  owner  of  the  farm  is  serious  enough,  but  the  situ- 
ation of  the  tenant  farmer  dependent  for  his  daily  bread  upon  the 
milk  check,  is  far  more  so  when  the  milk  company  becomes 
insolvent  or  the  fraudulent  operator  disappears  with  the  proceeds 
of  two  or  three  months'  milk.  This  situation  is  too  well  known  to 
require  extended  comment. 

It  appears  from  the  evidence  before  this  Committee  that  during 
the  year  1915  and  well  into  1916,  the  Beakes  Dairy  Company, 


608 

which  at  times  owed  the  dairymen  of  the  State  amounts  exceed- 
ing $100,000,  for  some  reason  or  other,  failed  to  make  payment 
to  the  dairymen  for  periods  approximating  ninety  clays.  During 
this  time  the  dairymen  were  without  current  funds  to  carry  on 
their  business.  This  condition  caused  serious  unrest  in  the  sec- 
tions of  the  State  where  this  large  company  was  operated.  This 
company  as  well  as  others  disregarded  the  provisions  of  the  statute 
requiring  that  a  bond  be  furnished  to  secure  the  payment  for 
the  milk  collected  at  the  country  stations.  The  company  in 
August,  1916,  was  still  operating  in  defiance  of  this  law.  The 
patrons  who  brought  milk  to  the  Beakes  Dairy  Company  were 
unsecured  against  loss,  if  for  any  reason  the  company  found 
itself  unable  to  make  payment  for  the  milk  delivered.  The  com- 
pany asserts  that  its  financial  condition  has  become  improved  to 
such  an  extent  that  it  now  pays  monthly  for  milk  delivered,  yet 
evidence  received  by  this  'Committee  at  the  station  in  Massena  in 
September  of  this  year  showed  just  grounds  of  complaint  because 
the  delayed  payments  still  existed.  It  was  practically  conceded 
before  the  'Committee  by  officers  of  this  company  that  it  was  not 
able  to  secure  a  bond  such  as  the  law  required.  If  this  is  the 
truth,  then  there  is  no  justification  for  permitting  the  company  to 
continue  in  business. 

No  possible  justification  can  be  found  for  asking  the 
dairymen  of  the  State  to  assume  a  risk  which  no  bonding 
company  will  undertake.  By  delaying  payment  for  as  much  as 
sixty  days,  it  is  possible  for  a  milk  collecting  company  to  continue 
in  business  for  some  time,  paying  the  dairymen  for  March  milk  on 
May  1st  from  the  proceeds  of  the  April  milk,  but  ultimately  there 
must  come  an  end  to  such  operations.  Overhead  charges  and  other 
charges  eat  into  the  fund.  Failure  results,  and  the  old  story  is 
repeated  of  the  dairyman  losing  the  proceeds  of  his  farm.  The 
average  dairyman  is  practically  unable  to  meet  this  situation 
individually.  In  the  case  of  the  Beakes  Dairy  'Company  no  pro- 
ceeding seems  to  have  been,  taken  to  enforce  the  law  until  the  month 
of  June,  1916,  when  an  action  was  commenced  in  the  courts  to 
enjoin  this  company  from  further  operations  without  compliance 
with  Section  55  of  the  Agricultural  La.w;  that  is,  securing-  a 
license  and  giving  the  bond.  The  evidence  shows  that  the  Depart- 


609 

ment  of  Agriculture  had  been  negotiating  with  the  Beakes  Dairy 
Company  practically  from  the  passage  of  the  act  until  the  month 
of  June  in  the  current  year  in  an  endeavor  to  have  it  comply  with 
the  law,  but  without  success. 

CONCLUSION 

It  seems  apparent  that  any  company  permitted  to  operate  among 
the  dairy  farms  of  the  State  should  have  sufficient  responsibility 
to  ensure  payment  to  the  dairymen  for  milk  collected.  There  seems 
to  be  no  just  ground  on  which  a  milk  gathering  company  should 
resist  the  operation  of  this  law.  Yet  this  company  hired  attorneys 
and  proceeded  to  contest  the  right  of  the  State  to  provide  this 
remedy  to  dairymen.  It  is  conceded  that  this  company,  as  well  as 
every  individual  of  the  State,  is  justified  in  asserting  its  full  legal 
rights  honestly  and  freely  in  the  courts  of  the  State,  still  it  is 
strongly  suggested  to  this  Committee  that  this  litigation  on  the 
part  of  the  Beakes  Dairy  Company,  is  resorted  to  because  of  its 
financial  inability  to  comply  with  the  law.  If  this  is  so,  the  situ- 
ation at  once  becomes  dangerous  for  the  dairymen  interested  and 
it  becomes  all  the  more  important  that  the  rights  of  the  Beakes 
Dairy  Company  under  this  act  should  have  been  determined  long 
prior  to  the  year  1916.  Then,  if  it  had  been  determined  that  the 
law  was  unconstitutional,  either  the  State  or  the  dairymen  could 
have  sought  other  remedies  to  meet  the  situation.  However  the 
situation  may  end,  the  dairyman  may  claim  to  have  been  misled  in 
some  degree  by  the  enactment  of  the  bonding  law  from  protecting 
himself.  The  mere  enactment  may  have  brought  a  sense  of  security 
to  many  patrons. 

As  a  _  matter  of  fact,  in  his  dealings  with  this  company, 
all  of  the  safqiniards  which  were  attempted  to  be  created 
were  rendered  valueless.  If  this  company,  or  any  other  company 
similarly  situated,  should  have  become  insolvent  without  compli- 
ance, the  dairymen  would  have  failed  to  receive  a  large  part  of  the 
money  due  them  for  their  milk.  So  far  as  the  Committee  is 
informed,  no  decision  has  yet  been  reached  in  the  litigation  which 
was  instituted  in  June,  1916,  to  determine  the  issue  between  the 
law  of  the  'State  and  the  Beakes  Dairy  Company.  The  Committee 
20 


610 

recommends  this  matter  very  earnestly  to  the  attention  of  the  Legis- 
lature. The  Department  of  Agriculture  is  not  satisfied  with  the  law 
in  ite  present  form.  Certain  discretionary  powers  are  lodged  with 
the  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  as  to  requiring  the  bond  or  a 
satisfactory  substitute.  It  is  claimed  that  this  discretionary  power 
weakens  the  act.  If  this  is  so,  a  prompt  remedy  should  be  pro- 
vided by  the  elimination  of  the  discretionary  power.  In  any  event, 
such  action  should  be  taken  as  will  provide  a  means  of  affording 
effectual  security  for  the  dairymen  and  a  prompt  and  vigorous 
application  of  those  means  when  provided. 

SUPERVISION  OF  MARKET  MILK 

Practically  every  large  municipality  in  the  State  endeavors 
through  its  department  of  health,  with  greater  or  less  efficiency,  to 
supervise  the  sanitary  conditions  surrounding  the  production  and 
delivery  of  milk  to  its  inhabitants.  The  various  municipal  regu- 
lations differ  in  detail  and  methods,  but  each  and  all  have  a  com- 
mon end,  first,  to  secure  milk  from  healthy  cows;  second,  to  ha/e 
it  produced  in  clean  surroundings  and  in.  a  clean  condition ;  third, 
to  have  it  handled  by  healthy  persons  so  it  may  not  become  a  source 
of  infection  or  aid  in  the  spread  of  disease ;  fourth,  to  have  it  free 
from  adulteration,  viz:  by  skimming.  There  are  dairy  sections 
in  the  State  of  'New  York  from  which  milk  is  shipped  to  as  many 
as  four  cities.  Each  of  these  cities  endeavors  to  maintain  a  sep- 
arate system  of  inspection  of  the  dairy  farms  supplying  its  needs 
and  employs  a  separate  inspector  or  inspectors  of  farms,  gathering 
stations  and  milk  routes.  The  administration  of  this  work  is  con- 
fined to  the  health  authorities.  That  unguarded  milk  in  the  past 
has  been  a  frequent  cause  of  the  spread  of  disease  has  been  abun- 
dantly established  and  is  conceded  by  all  persons  acquainted  with 
the  subject.  Typhoid  fever,  septic  sore  throat,  scarlet  fever 
and  other  malignant  diseases  have  been  surely  and  certainly  traced 
to  an  infected  milk  supply.  Bovine  tuberculosis  in  infants  and 
young  children  has  been  established  to  occur  in  all  too  many  cases. 
As  the  result  of  these  studies  and  investigations  disinterested  and 
public- spirited  men,  especially  in  the  city  of  New  York,  have  led 
in  the  movement  to  ensure  that  the  milk  sold  the  inhabitants  of 
that  and  other  cities  was  free  from  these  objectionable  features. 


on 

The  results  of  their  labor  are  best  shown  by  a  study  of  the  mortality 
tables  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

PASTEURIZATION 

Practically  all  competent  authorities  now  agree  that  the  milk 
supply  can  'be  prevented  from  being  a  carrier  of  disease  by  two 
methods. 

First,  by  producing  milk  so  safeguarded  against  contamination 
as  to  be  practically  sterile  by  its  method  of  production.  Obviously, 
this  method  requires  careful  supervision,  high  cost,  and  a  constant 
and  continuing  expense  which  is  beyond  the  means  of  most  muni- 
cipalities to  carry  out.  It  also  means  high  and  continued  cost  to 
the  producer  and  consequently  to  the  consumer.  This  is  well  shown 
by  the  exhibit  made  by  the  Markham  &  Puffer  farm  at  Avon, 
contained  in  this  report. 

'Second,  by  pasteurization,  which  simply  means  heating  the  milk 
for  a  short  period  at  such  a  degree  of  temperature  as  will  make  no 
substantial  change  in  its  food  value  or  food  uses.  It  is  a  simple 
and  comparatively  inexpensive  process  and  despite  the  objections 
raised  thereto  by  various  persons  and  interests,  statistics  and  experi- 
ence demonstrate  that  it  is  an  effectual  method  of  safeguarding 
the  consumer  from  the  milk  carried  diseases. 

HEALTH  REGULATIONS  BENEFICIAL  TO  THE  PRODUCER  OF 

MARKET  MILK 

It  is  beyond  question  that  the  health  regulations  to  control  the 
milk  supply  of  the  City  of  New  York  and  the  other  cities  of  the 
State  have  been  and  will  be  of  benefit  to  the  dairymen  of  the  State. 
The  increase  of  consumption  of  market  milk  by  the  inhabitants  of 
our  large  cities  has  kept  pace  with  the  improvement  in  the  quality 
supplied.  This  is  well  shown  by  the  following  table  furnished  the 
Committee  by  Professor  George  F.  Warren  of  the  New  York  State 
College  of  Agriculture : 


612 


RECEIPTS  OF  MILK,  CREAM  AND  CONDENSED  MILK,  NEW  YORK  MARKET 

1885-1914 

Milk         Cream  and  con- 
40  quart       densed  milk  40 

cans  quart  cans 

1885 4,930,459  172,076 

1886 5,268,455  176,483 

1887 5,663,210  185,717 

1888 5,817,809  210,678 

1889 6,076,192  199,401 

1890 6,284,732  137,007 

1891 6,715,155  151,098 

1892 - 7,221,877  187,636 

1893 .  . 7,293,513  204,886 

1894  7,479,273  210,269 

1895 7,730,411  296,629 

1896 7,996,924  223,778 

1897 8,330,504  238,876 

1898 8,829,805  274,003 

1899 9,076,432  412,704 

1900 9.388,947  422,754 

1901 9,757,835  460,334 

1902 10,197,387  493,707 

1903 10,875,516  549,871 

1904 11,640,225  598,218 

1905 12,349,752  709,976 

1906 13,762,629  747,920 

1907 14,327,154  733,925 

1908 14,511,787  685,406 

1909 15,026,145  736,569 

1910  15,820,330  815,598 

1911 16,757,197  903,799 

1912  17,323,230  900,131 

1913 17,947,797  943,947 

1914 18, 157,724  964, 159 


Is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that  in  that  community  where 
the  inhabitants  have  reason  to  believe  that  the  milk  supply  is 
carefully  guarded  and  its  wholesomeness  ensured,  a  much 
greater  quantity  will  'be  used  than  in  the  community  where  the 
inhabitants  have  reason  to  mistrust  the  effectiveness  of  the  author- 
ities in  safeguarding  the  milk  supply  ?  It  would  necessarily  appear 
that  the  consumption  of  milk  for  food  will  be  much  greater  in  the 
community  that  feels  sure  that  the  milk  furnished  is  not  a  carrier 
of  disease  than  in  those  communities  in  which  no  such  assurance 
is  given.  Therefore,  we  conclude  it  is  most  important  to  the  pro- 
ducer that  the  great  consuming  centers  be  satisfied  that  the  milk 
furnished  them  is  produced  under  careful  supervision  and  control, 
and  the  producers  should  co-operate  with  the  authorities  in  estab- 
lishing that  conviction  in  the  mind  of  the  consumer.  There  is  a 
further  consideration  of  these  subjects  which  is  of  great  importance 


613 

to  the  dairymen  of  the  'State  of  New  York.  If  it  be  assumed  that 
municipal  health  regulations  require  preparation,  expense  and 
constant  improvement  of  methods  on  the  dairy  farm,  the  dairy 
farms  that  meet  those  requirements  so  long  as  they  are  strictly 
adhered  to  by  the  health  department  of  the  cities  or  other  author- 
ity, will  have  a  practical  monopoly  of  the  milk  supply  to  the 
particular  cities  concerned,  and  when  the  farms  are  once  equipped 
to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  health  department  for  the  produc- 
tion of  market  milk,  the  dairymen  are  concerned  that  those  require- 
ment® be  strictly  -adhered  to  by  the  city.  Ultimately,  the  expense 
of  such  improved  conditions  must  be  borne  by  the  consumer,  but 
if  the  requirements  of  the  department  are  to  be  waived  for  a  given 
period,  such  as  was  demanded  by  some  during  the  late  so-called 
milk  stirke  in  this  State,  those  farms  are  at  once  thrown  into  com- 
petition with  all  the  milk  available,  which,  in  an  emergency,  might 
include  milk  from  Wisconsin  or  Minnesota.  .  This  latter  considera- 
tion does  not  seem  to  nave  occurred  to  those  who  quarrelled  with 
the  position  of  the  Department  of  Health  of  the  city  of  New  York 
during  the  "  late  unpleasantness  "  because  it  refused  to  waive  the 
health  regulations  of  that  city  during  that  period.  Had  it  not 
been  for  the  stringent  health  regulations  of  that  city  requiring  the 
introduction  of  milk  into  the  city  to  be  from  inspected  and 
improved  farms,  undoubtedly  the  requirements  of  the  city  could 
have  been  provided  for  by  milk  from  distant  and  uninspected 
localities  where  the  dairymen's  league  price  was  not  insisted  upon. 

THE  MILK  SUPPLY  OF  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

One  of  the  most  important  functions  of  the  Health  Department 
of  the  city  of  New  York  is  the  supervision  of  the  milk  supply. 
It  was  formally  attempted  through  this  Department  to  ac- 
tually supervise  the  methods  of  production  on  every  dairy  farm 
from  which  milk  was  received  in  the  city.  The  adoption  of  uniform 
pasteurization,  however,  obviated  that  expense  in  a  large  degree. 
The  methods  of  production  on  the  individual  farms  are  at  this  datei 
largely  left  to  the  milk  companies  under  the  supervision  of  a  health 
department  official.  A  check  on  the  methods  is  provided  by  the 
sediment  test  and  bacteria  count.  Pasteurization,  affords  a  reason- 
able safeguard  from  disease  carrying  milk.  The  equipment  for 
safeguarding  the  milk  supply  in  the  city  of  New  York  is  as  com- 


614 

piete  as  can  well  be  provided,  and  after  as  careful  an  examination 
of  the  records  of  that  department  and  an  inquiry  into  its  methods 
as  the  time  at  the  disposal  of  the  Committee  permitted,  it  is  pos- 
sible to  say  that  the  administration  appears  free  from  corruption, 
graft  or  sinister  control;  that  it  is  in  charge  of  competent  and 
experienced  men  who  perform  their  duty  in  a  manner  beneficial 
alike  to  the  consumer  and  producer.  The  larger  milk  companies 
supplying  milk  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  city  are  equipped  with 
complete  laboratories  for  the  test  and  analysis  of  all  milk  furnished 
by  them.  The  smaller  companies  have  access  to  a  laboratory 
maintained  by  their  joint  contribution  and  for  a  similar  purpose. 
Independent  of  these,  and  constantly  engaged  in*  sampling,  analyz- 
ing and  testing  the  milk  supply  is  the  laboratory  maintained  by 
the  city  for  that  purpose,  which  ensures  as  sure  and  permanent  a 
record  as  can  well  be  made  of  the  quality  and  condition  of  the  milk 
supplied  to  its  inhabitants.  We  believe  that  no  other  city  has  taken 
equal  measure  to  safeguard  its  inhabitants.  We  believe  that  no 
other  city  is  supplied  with  such  pure  and  wholesome  milk  and  at 
such  reasonable  price  when  other  factors  of  cost  are  taken  into  con- 
sideration. We  believe  these  propositions  to  be  well  established, 
first,  by  the  detailed  records  of  the  department ;  second,  by  decreas- 
ing mortality  from  milk  carried  diseases  -as  indisputably  shown  and 
established  by  the  mortality  records ;  third,  by  the  greatly  increased 
consumption  of  milk  in  the  city.  The  records  of  the  department 
furnished  from  the  constant  daily  analysis  of  milk  show  the  butter 
fat  and  solids,  not  fat  content,  of  the  average  milk  supply  of  the 
city  for  many  years.  A  convincing  illustration  of  those  statistics 
is  shown,  by  the  following  charts,  which  are  established  by  the 
record  of  the  Department  and  the  oaths  of  its  officials, 

UNLAWFUL  SKIMMING  OF  MARKET  MILK 

The  companies  engaged  in  the  distribution  of  milk  in  the  city 
and  who  have  trade  names  and  good-will  of  great  value  are  can- 
stantly  engaged  in  an  effort  to  ensure  a  high  butter  fat  content  in 
the  milk  handled  by  them.  Undoubtedly,  from  time  to  time,  the 
proprietors  of  certain  milk  stations  engaged  in  shipping  milk  to 
!N~ew  York  city  to  foe  sold  principally  at  wholesale  or  from  stores, 
endeavor  to  secure  some  additional  profit  by  removing  a  portion  of 
the  cream  from  the  milk  during  the  season  when  a  part  of  the  butter 


615 


fat  can  be  removed  and  still  leave  a  percentage  sufficiently  high  to 
meet  the  legal  requirements.  An  examination  of  the  records  of 
three  shipping  stations  whose  superintendents.1  were  called  before 
the  Committee  apparently  showed  that  cream  was  being  illegiti- 
mately extracted  from  milk  shipped.  The  original  records  of  these 
three  stations  are  in  the  possession  of  the  Committee.  These 
records  were  produced  before  the  Committee  by  the  station  super- 
intendent and  the  superintedent  examined  in  connection  therewith. 

EXHIBIT  123 
DAILY  SHIPPING  REPORT  OF  MODEL  DAIRY  COMPANY,  246  EIGHTH  AVENUE, 

NEW  YORK  CITY,  FROM  GREENWAY,  N.  Y.,  JANUARY  1,  1916 
January  1 :  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 357 

Milk  from  previous  day 63 

Total  of  milk  received  and  from  previous  day 5 , 420 

Shipments  this  day,  50  cans 4,250 

Milk  left  over  after  shipping 1 , 105 

Milk  used  for  manufacturing none 

Shipped  to  Shapiro. 
January  2 : . 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 409 

Milk  from  previous  day 1 , 105 

Total 6,514 

Milk  shipped,  70  cans,  5,950  pounds. 

Heavy  cream  shipped,  1  can. 

Milk  left  after  shipping,  445. 

Milk  used  for  manufacturing,  1  can,  85  pounds. 

Total  amount  on  hand  and  shipped,  6,480  pounds. 

Cans 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy 20 

Shipped  to  Shapiro 50 

Total 70 

January  3:  Pounds 

Milk  received 5 , 266 

Milk  from  previous  day 445 

Total 5,711 

Milk  shipped,  25  cans,  2,125  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  25  cans. 

January  4:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 237 

Milk  from  previous  day 3 , 570 

Total 8,807 

— 

Shipped  33  cans,  2,805  pounds. 
On  hand,  70  cans,  5,950  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  33  cans. 


616 


January  5: 

Milk  received 

Milk  from  previous  day. . 


EXHIBIT  123  —  (Continued) 


Total 


Shipments,  80  cans  milk,  6,800  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipping,  4,250  pounds, 

Milk  used  for  manufacturing,  170  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  25  cans  milk,  2  cans  heavy  cream. 

Shipped  to  Shapiro,  55  cans  of  milk. 

Total,  80  cans  of  milk;  2  cans  of  cream. 

January  6: 

Milk  received 

Milk  from  previous  day 


Total 


Shipped  this  day,  80  cans,  6,800  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipment,  31  cans,  2,635  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  25  cans;  to  Shapiro,  55  cans. 

January  7: 

Milk  received 

Milk  from  previous  day 


Total 


Shipped,  80  cans,  6,800  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipping,  12  cans,  1,020  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  25  cans. 

Shipped  to  Shapiro,  55  cans. 

Total,  80  cans. 

January  8: 

Milk  received  this  day 

Milk  from  previous  day 


Total 


Shipments,  50  cans,  4,250  pounds. 
On  hand,  22  cans,  1,870  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans.. 

January  9: 

Milk  received  this  day 

Milk  from  previous  day 


Total 


Shipments  this  day,  milk,  61  cans,  5,015  pounds. 

Shipments  this  day,  heavy  cream,  2  cans. 

On  hand,  22  cans,  1,870  pounds. 

Milk  used  for  manufacturing,  170  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  9  cans  milk;  2  cans  cream. 

Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans  milk. 

Total,  59  cans  milk;  2  cans  cream. 


Pounds 
5,242 
5,950 

11,192 


Pounds 
5,238 
4,250 

9,488 


Pounds 
5,216 
2,635 

7,851 


Pounds 
5,148 
1.020 

6,168 


Pounds 
5,226 
1,870 

7,096 


617 


EXHIBIT  123  —  (Continued) 

January  10:  Pounds 

Received  this  day,  milk 5 , 129 

Milk  from  previous  day 1 , 870 

Total 6,999 

Shipments  this  day,  50  cans,  4,260  pounds. 
On  hand,  32  cans,  2,720  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  11:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 193 

From  previous  day 2 , 720 

Total 7,913 

Shipments,  milk,  40  cans,  3,400  pounds. 
On  hand,  53  cans,  4,505  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  40  cans.. 

January  12:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5,237 

Milk  from  previous  day 4, 505 

Total 9,742 

Shipped  this  day,  milk,  81  cans,  6,885  pounds;  heavy  cream,  2  cans. 
Milk  on  hand,  2,635  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  milk,  31  cans;  heavy  cream,  2  cans. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  13:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 295 

From  previous  day 2 , 635 

Total..  7,930 


Shipments,  76  cans,  6,460  pounds. 

On  hand,  1,400  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy  Company,  milk,  26  cans. 

Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

Total,  76  cans. 

January  14: 

Milk  received  this  day 

Milk  from  previous  day 


Total 


Shipments,  65  cans,  5,525  pounds. 
On  hand  after  shipment,  1,084  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  65  cans. 

January  15: 

Milk  received  this  day 

From  previous 


Total 


Pounds 
5,264 
1,400 

6,664 


Pounds 
5,187 
1,084 

6,271 


Shipments  this  day,  65  cans  milk,  5 , 525  pounds. 
On  hand  after  shipment,  8  cans,  680  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  65  cans. 


618 


EXHIBIT  123  —  (Continued) 

January  16:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5,217 

Milk  from  previous  day 680 

Total 5,897 

Shipments  this  dayf  67  cans  milk,  5,695  pounds,  on  hand,  212  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  17  cans  milk. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans  milk. 
Total,  67  cans  milk. 

January  17:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5,746 

Milk  from  previous  day 212 

Total 5,958 

Shipments  this  day,  60  cans,  5,100  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipping,  2  cans,  170  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  10  cans  milk;  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  18:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 137 

Milk  from  previous  day • 170 

Total 5,307 

Shipped  this  day,  60  cans,  5,100  pounds. 

Milk  after  shipping,  127  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  10  cans  milk;  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  19:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 029 

From  previous  day 127 

Total 5,156 


Shipments,  59  cans,  5,015  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipments,  1  can,  85  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  9  cans;  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  20: 
On  hand  after  shipment,  1  can,  85  pounds. 

January  21: 
On  hand  after  shipment,  63  pounds. 

January  27 : 

Milk  received  this  day 

From  previous  day 


Total 


Pounds 

5,506 

340 

5,846 


Shipments,  67  cans,  5,695  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipment,  2  cans,  170  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  17  cans;  Shapiro,  50  cans;  total,  67  cans. 


619 

EXHIBIT  123  —  (Continued) 

January  28:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 683 

From  previous  day 170 

Total..  5,853 


Shipments  this  day,  67  cans,  5,695  pounds. 
On  hand  after  shipment,  85  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  17  cans. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

January  29:  Pounds 

Received  this  day : 5 , 528 

From  previous  day 85 

Total 5,613 

Shipments  this  day,  45  cans,  3,825  pounds. 
On  hand  after  shipment,  21  cans,  1,785  pounds. 
Shipped  to  Shapiro,  45  cans. 

January  30:  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 569 

Milk  from  previous  day 1 , 785 

Total 7,354 

Shipped  this  day,  63  cans  of  milk,  5,355  pounds,  2  cans  heavy  cream. 

On  hand  after  shipment,  21  cans  milk,  1,785  pounds. 

Milk  used  for  manufacturing,  170  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  13  cans  milk;  2  cans  heavy  cream. 

Shipped  to  Shapiro,  50  cans  milk. 

Total,  63  cans  milk;  2  cans  heavy  cream. 

January  31 :  Pounds 

Milk  received  this  day 5 , 482 

Milk  from  previous  day : . .  1 , 785 

Total 7,267 

Shipments,  68  cans,  5,780  pounds. 

On  hand  after  shipment,  1,445  pounds. 

Shipped  to  Model  Dairy,  18  cans;  Shapiro,  50  cans. 

JOHN  L.  'CARVER,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
I  live  at  Greenway  on  tlie  New  York  Central  Railroad  between 
Rome  and  Verona,  N.  Y.  I  have  charge  of  the  milk  station  there 
of  the  Model  Dairy  Company  of  246  Eighth  Avenue,  New  York 
city.  We  receive  the  milk,  cool  it  and  ship  it,  and  we  have  a 
pasteurization  plant  and  a  separator ;  also  cheese  and  butter  equip- 
ment. After  our  milk  is  pasteurized  it  will  keep,  as  long  as  you 
keep  it  cool,  almost  indefinitely.  We  pasteurize  it  before  we 
separate  the  cream.  I  have  here  the  statements  from  the  officer 
from  January  1st  to  31st.  This  gives  the  day  of  the  month,  the 


620 

pounds  of  milk,  the  cans  shipped,  and  the  pounds  shipped,  and  the 
amount  received  each  day. 

Mr.  Ward. — On  January  2nd,  you  received  5,409  pounds  of 
milk  and  made  one  can  of  cream.  How  did  you  make  that  can  of 
cream  ? 

Mr.  -Carver. — With  the  separator. 

Mr.  Ward. — You  shipped  to  New  York  5,950  pounds  in  70 
cans.  Did  you  ship  the  cans  of  skim  milk;  that  is,  the  separated 
milk? 

Mr.  Carver. — No,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — What  did  you  do  with  the  separated  milk  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Most  of  the  separated  milk  we  dump  into  the 
drain. 

Mr.  Ward. — Don't  the  farmers  take  it? 

Mr.  'Carver. — No,  sir;  not  this  year.  We  have  dumped  our 
skim  milk,  all  of  it;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.— Who  is  Shapiro  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — He  is  a  milk  dealer  in  New  York;  I  cannot  tell 
you  where;  the  milk  goes  to  30th  street. 

Mr.  Ward. — January  1st,  you  received  5,357  Ibs. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  you  had  63  Ibs.  over? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  made  you  5,446  pounds. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

'Mr.  Ward. — And  that  day  you  shipped  50  cans  to  Shapiro, 
4,250  pounds,  and  you  had  on  hand  13  cans,  1,105  pounds.  That 
gave  you  a  total  amount  on.  hand  and  shipped  of  5,355  pounds. 
You  ought  to  have  had  5,420  pounds  to  balance,  had  you  not  ? 

Mr.  Carver. —  Yes,  sir.  I  was  short  65  pounds.  It  is  wasted 
milk  in  handling. 


621 

Mr.  Ward. — On  January  2nd,  you  received  5,409  pounds  and 
had  1,105  pounds  over.  That  gave  you  6,514  pounds.  You 
shipped  5,950  pounds  in  the  TO  cans  and  had  5  cans  of  milk  left 
over,  or  445  pounds,  as  you  put  it  down. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — Then  you  say,  milk  used  for  manufacture,  85 
pounds. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes. 

Mr.  Ward. — Did  you  separate  one  can  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — We  separated  just  one  can,  you  understand ;  one 
can  of  cream. 

Mr.  Ward. — Well,  that  would  make  more  that  85  pounds. 

Mr.  Carver. — Made  more  than  85  pounds  of  milk,  but  that  is 
all  we  put  in  to  ship. 

Mr.  Ward. — You  only  had  5  cans  left.  Four  hundred  and  forty- 
five  pounds  was  all  you  had  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — 'So  that  out  of  the  445  pounds  of  milk  you  made 
one  can  of  cream  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Made  one  can  of  cream. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  is,  you  reduced  the  five  cans  to  one  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  would  'he  what  kind  of  cream,  what  per  cent  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Well,  that  would  he  about  8  per  cent  cream.  I 
was  short  34  pounds.  That  shortage  might  have  come  up  just 
lumping  the  amount,  or  in  various  ways. 

Mr.  Ward. — So  that  January  2nd  you  were  all  cleaned  up ;  you 
didn't  have  anything  to  carry  over  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — iNo,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — So  that  on  January  2nd,  your  station  was  cleaned 
up  and  you  had  nothing  left  over  there  but  cans  of  skim  milk. 


622 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — Now,  on  the  3rd,  you  received.  5,266  pounds  and 
you  carried  milk  from  previous  day,  445  pounds.  That  was  really 
skim  milk.  Then  you  say,  total  amount  of  milk  received  and  from 
previous  day,  5,711  pounds. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.— You  add  the  445  in. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — The  can  of  skim  milk  from  the  2nd  had  gone  right 
into  the  whole  milk  from  the  3rd ;  isn't  that  true  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — No.  sir ;  I  don't  get  that. 

Mr.  Ward. — Yrour  skim  milk,  that  had  made  three  cans  of 
cream  between  the  1st  and  5th,  must  have  either  been  in  the  1,020 
pounds  that  you  carried  over  on  the  7th,  or  the  6,800  pounds  that 
you  shipped,  or  in  previous  shipments ;  they  have  got  to  be  in  one 
place  or  another,  according  to  these  sheets,  haven't  they  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — That  was  whole  milk.  There  is  no  skim  milk ;  it 
must  be  somewhere.  That  was  20  per  cent  cream  I  shipped  the 
Model  Dairy  Company. 

Mr.  Ward. — On  January  9th,  you  received  5,226  pounds  and 
you  had  on  hand  1,870  pounds,  which  gave  you  7,096  pounds.  Is 
that  correct? 

Mr.  'Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  W>ard. — You  shipped  the  Model  Dairy  Company  9  cans 
of  milk  and  2  cans  of  cream  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  was  20  per  cent  cream  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir;  20  per  cent  cream. 

Mr.  Ward. — You  shipped  out  59  cans,  or  5,015  pounds.  You 
had  22  cans  left,  which  equals  1,870  pounds,  and  you  had  170 
pounds1  of  cream.  That  gave  you  7,059  pounds.  That  comes 
within  41  pounds  of  being  the  7,096  pounds  that  you  had  on  hand. 
Isn't  that  right  ? 


623 

Mr.  Carver. — That  is  the  way  it  looks  there. 

Mr.  Ward. — On  March  3rd,  you  had  after  shipment,  170  pounds 
on  hand.  On  March  4th  you  received  5,825  pounds;  adding  the 
170  gave  you  5,995  'pounds.  You  shipped  out  2,125  pounds  and 
it  left  you  45  cans  on  hand,  3,825  pounds. 

Mr.  Carver. — That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Ward. — On  March  5th,  you  received  6,012  pounds.  This 
gave  you  9,387  pounds,  and  on  that  date  you  shipped  to  the  Model 
Dairy  'Company  25  cans  of  milk  and  2  cans  of  cream,  and  to 
Shapiro  40  cans. 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward.— You  shipped  then  5,800  pounds;  you  had  left  3,825 
pounds,  and  you  used  for  manufacturing,  you  say,  170  pounds. 
That  really  meant  two  cans  of  cream,  didn't  it  ? 

Mr.  Carver. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — To  get  the  two  cans  of  cream,  you  had  used  more 
than  1701  pounds? 

Mr.  'Carver. — But  we  used  it  to  balance  the  weight.  That  62 
pounds  wasted ;  it  balanced  the  account. 

Mr.  Ward. — The  milk  from  which  you  got  the  two  cans  of  cream 
was  necessarily  embraced  in  this  9,775  pounds,  wasn't  it? 

Mr.  Carver. — It  looks  so  according  to  that  balance.  It  looks  that 
way. 

Both  from  the  records  of  the  shipping  station  and  the  lack  of 
satisfactory  explanation  of  the  records  by  the  station  superinten- 
dent, it  is  not  difficult  to  reach  the  conclusion  that  the  Model  Dairy 
Company  was  illegitimately  taking  a  part  of  the  butter  fat  from 
the  winter  milk  at  the  station  above  described. 

Proceeding  to  Oneida,  Madison  county,  the  Committee 
examined  and  audited  the  station  records  of  a  station  operated 
under  the  name  of  the  National  Dairy  Company  of  Brooklyn,  at 
Wampsville,  Madison  County,  N.  Y. 


624 

•C.    E.    DEXTER,   called   before  the    Committee   and   sworn, 
testified : 

"  I  live  in  Wampsville  and  run  the  shipping  station  of  the 
National  Dairy  Company  of  Brooklyn.  Its  address  is  Nos.  358- 
360  Oakland  street,  Brooklyn.  The  general  manager  of  the  com- 
pany whom  I  meet  and  talk  over  the  business  matters  with  is  Chris 
Oher.  He  lived  in  Brooklyn.  James  Dexter  and  Lee  Hyer  work 
with  me.  I  have  been  in  that  station  twelve  years.  It  was 
formerly  run  by  Chris  Oher  personally,  but  they  have  a  corpora- 
tion now.  We  made  some  cheese  in  June  and  here  is  the  shipping 
records.  All  the  cheese  we  make  is  branded,  New  York  State 
Whole  Milk  Cheese,  or  Full  Milk  Cheese. 

Mr.  Ward. — Have  you  got  your  records  showing  your  receipts 
and  shipments  of  milk  for  1916  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — No,  sir ;  I  have  not. 

Mr.  Ward. — Doesn't  the  Agricultural  Law  require  that  you  keep 
a  record  each  day  of  milk  received,  milk  on  hand,  from  yesterday, 
milk  manufactured,  and  milk  shipped  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — Yes,  sir;  they  do. 
Mr.  Ward. — Don't  you  keep  that  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — No,  sir;  I  don't.  I  used  to  keep  it  right  along, 
but  I  got  off  from  keeping  it. 

Mr.  Ward. — You  know  that  this  statement  should  balance  each 
day? 

Mr.  Dexter. — Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Do  you  know  the  law  requires  that  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — I  do.  I  kept  those  accounts  up  four  or  five  years 
and  there  was  only  once  that  we  were  called  upon  to  see  that  report. 
That  was  about  six  years  ago.  Nobody  has  been  there  since.  I 
have  never  had  a  sealer  of  weights  and  measures  there.  I  have 
got  sheets  for  June,  July  and  August.  I  carry  some  milk  over 
from  one  day  to  another.  I  have  all  the  August  record  of  what 
we  took  in  and  what  was  carried  over.  We  were  making  two  cans 
of  cream  a  week. 


625 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  you  do  with  the  skim  milk  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  We  used  some  of  it  for  Dutch  cheese  and  some  of 
it  was  sold.  The  Dutch  cheese  was  used  and  sold  to  different  ones ; 
I  didn't  sell  it  myself. 

Mr.  Ward.—  Who  did  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  The  Brooklyn  man  who  was  up  here  and  put  in 
the  pasteurizing  plant;  he  sold  it  right  around  home;  I  don't  kno* 
who  bought  it ;  I  didn't  sell  any  of  it.  The  Brooklyn  man  was  here 
five  weeks.  He  put  up  a  pasteurizing  plant  and  he  run  the  business 
while  there ;  I  don't  know  how  much  Dutch  cheese  he  made ;  you 
will  have  to  ask  the  man  who  did  it.  He  didn't  make  up  a  hundred 
pounds.  He  would  make  up  what  he  could  from  a  can  now  and 
then. 

Mr.  Ward. —  From  a  can  of  what  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Of  skim  milk. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  you  do  with  the  other  cans  of  skim  milk  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  We  used  some  for  butter-milk. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  you  do  with  the  butter-milk  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Drank  it  and  sold  it. 

Mr.  Ward.— Who  did  you  sell  that  to? 

Mr.  Dexter.  —  Different  ones. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Can't  you  name  someone  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir ;  there  is  a  conductor  on  the  milk  train 
that  got  some  there.  Some  days  he  would  get  three  quarts,  some 
days  two,  some  days  one ;  different  ones  around  the  village  bought 
it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  per  cent  of  cream  did  you  make  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — It  was  hand  skimmed  cream ;  we  had  no  separator ; 
we  skimmed  it  by  letting  it  stand  from  one  day  to  the  next  either 
iced  or  in  water  in  the  cooler.  The  milk  would  be  in  the  40  quart 
cans  after  we  had  prepared  them  to  ship  to  !N~ew  York,  but  were 
carried  over  in  the  cooler.  This  cream  that  we  got  we  took  off 


02(5 

those  cans.    It  was  pretty  good  skim  milk,  that  we  had  left.     That 
is  the  way  I  was  authorized  to  make  cream  in  this  station. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Who  authorized  you  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Why  Chris  Oher  or  the  National  Dairy  Company. 
Nobody  ever  told  me  to  dip  some  cream  out  of  those  cans  that  were 
in  the  cooler.  We  got  more  than  two  cans  a  week  in  June  as  ap- 
pears on  the  statement,  that  was  hand  skimmed.  Most  of  it  came 
out  of  the  cans  in  the  cooler.  I  used  a  pointed  dipper  to  take  it  off 
the  cans  with.  I  used  a  dipper.  I  don't  know  whether  Hyer  saw 
me  do  it  or  not.  I  know  I  had  the  cans  of  cream.  I  was  ordered 
to  ship  two  cans  a  week.  I  shipped  it  to  the  National  Dairy  Com- 
pany. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  shipped  a  can  of  cream  on  August  7th.  Is 
that  right? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  When  did  you  dip  that  cream  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  That  was  skimmed  off  the  cans  that  was  carried 
over  in  the  cooler.  It  was  shipped  the  day  after  it  was  finished. 
It  was  finished  on  the  7th.  I  had  been  dipping  to  get  that  can  two 
or  three  days.  I  don't  remember  whether  I  had  been  dipping  since 
the  3rd.  It  took  me  four  days  to  get  a  can  of  cream.  I  got  about 
ten  quarts  a  day.  I  cannot  tell  you  how  many  cans  I  dipped  milk 
off  on.  the  6th.  I  did  not  make  any  pot  cheese  or  butter-milk  on 
the  6th.  I  skimmed  four  or  five  cans  of  milk  to  get  this  can  of 
cream  that  I  shipped  August  1st.  It  would  be  light  cream;  of 
course,  it  would  not  be  heavy  cream.  For  the  can  I  shipped  on  the 
3rd,  I  skimmed  about  five.  And  for  the  can  I  shipped  on  the  7th, 
I  skimmed  about  five. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  you  had  fifteen  cans  of  skim  milk  the  first  week 
in  August,  did  you  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Well,  about  that;  yes,  sir.  I  shipped  a  can  of 
cream  on  July  30th,  another  on  July  28th,  another  on  July  24th, 
another  on  July  the  22d,  another  on  July  the  21st,  another  on  July 
the  19th,  another  on  July  the  17th,  another  on  July  the  15th, 
another  on  July  14th,  one  on  July  the  llth,  one  on  July  the  5th, 


62T 

and  one  on  July  the  3d,  so  I  should  have  had  65  cans  of  skim  milk 
at  five  cans  of  milk  to  one  can  of  cream,  but  I  didn't  have  any  65 
cans  of  skim  milk. 

Mr.  Ward.— Why? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Because,  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Ward. —  There  are  thirteen  cans  of  cream  you  shipped. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  yet  you  say  you  skimmed  about  five  cans  of 
milk  to  make  a  can  of  cream  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  do. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  you  had  65  cans,  didn't  you,  of  skimmed 
milk? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  you  were  not  right  when  you  told  me  you 
did  not  have  65  because  you  did  have  them,  didn't  you  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Sure.  Those  65  cans  are  not  up  in  the  cooler. 
They  have  been  sold  and  churned. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  didn't  churn  skimmed  milk  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Oh,  that  was  not  skimmed  close. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Did  you  make  butter  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  made  some  buttermilk  to  drink,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  didn't  drink  that  65  cans  of  skimmed  milk ; 
you  never  drank  all  of  that. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Ward.—  What  did  you  do  with  it  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Well,  it  was  used  up. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  know  you  cannot  honestly  account  for  those 
65  cans. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  will  tell  you  where  some  of  that  cream  came 
from.  It  did  not  come  from  the  skim ;  there  was  a  batch  pasteur- 
izer in  the  plant  and  on  the  last  run  of  this  milk  running  from  this 


628 

batch  pasteurizer  it  is  clear  cream  and  you  cannot  help  having  it  on 
there  in  any  way  and  that  was  saved  out  of  the  last  end  for  cream. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  must  be  a  useful  separator  and  pasteurizer 
combined. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  am  telling  you  as  it  is.  They  put  in  a  batch 
pasteurizer  to  run  and  the  fellow  was  up  there  and  he  run  it ;  we 
didn't  have  power  to  run  the  pasteurizer  and  on  the  last  end  there 
is  a  coil  in  there,  of  course,  but  the  milk  gets  below  the  coil  and 
the  milk  gets  no  chance  for  agitation  and  while  it  is  running  off 
there  is  a  percentage  of  cream  rising  on  the  milk;  I  don't  know 
the  name  of  the  pasteurizer,  and  this  milk  was  always  run  through 
a  coil  of  pipes,  went  up  and  into  a  coil.  Now  it  has  to  go  up  and 
into  the  pasteurizer  and  then  has  to  go  along  through  another 
pipe  and  into  the  cooler.  I  do  dip  a  percentage  in  the  cooler, 
but  there  is  some  I  cannot  dip  nor  I  cannot  avoid  that.  That  takes 
the  cream  out  of  the  milk  just  the  same.  The  milk  that  came  out 
of  the  pasteurizer  was  shipped  to  New  York  with  the  other.  All 
of  this  cream  that  I  shipped  did  not  come  from  this  pasteurizer. 
It  was  not  so  in  fact  that  I  dipped  all  of  this  cream  out  of  the  neck 
of  the  cans.  I  have  dipped  a  full  can  in  the  way  I  have  told  of 
40  quarts  of  cream  with  this  pointed  dipper ;  I  don't  know  whether 
I  did  it  in  July  or  not.  The  pasteurizer  does  not  make  enough ; 
I  have  to  dip.  I  understand  it  is  perfectly  impossible  for  me  to 
account  for  the  disposition  of  65  cans  of  skimmed  milk  from  that 
station  in  July  and  I  cannot  do  it  under  my  theory  of  dipping  or 
under  the  buttermilk  that  I  drank,  so  I  have  this  explanation  of  the 
pasteurizer. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Which  is  the  truth,  the  dipper  or  the  pasteurizer 
making  this  cream  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Both.  I  cannot  say  how  much  of  those  fifteen 
cans  of  cream  were  made  by  the  dipping  process.  I  do  not  know 
how  much  I  have  skimmed.  I  do  not  know  how  much  would  run 
out  over  the  cooler  from  the  pasteurizer;  some  days  more  than 
others, —  yesterday,  perhaps  ten  or  twelve  quarts.  As  soon  as  I  get 
a  can  full  by  a  little  dipping  and  a  little  pasteurizing,  I  would  ship 
it  to  New  York.  These  are  my  orders.  I  was  not  taught  to  pasteur- 
ize. The  fellow  tried  to  pasteurize  the  milk,  but  we  didn't  have 


629 

the  power  so  it  looks  as  if  we  only  used  it  for  separating.  By  the 
sheets  it  shows  that  on  July  20th  we  received  5,428  pounds  of  milk 
and  we  shipped  62  85  Ib.  cans  and  that  only  left  on  hand  158 
pounds  of  milk,  which  we  carried  over.  On  July  21st,  we  received 
5,592  pounds  and  we  shipped  5,525  pounds  to  New  York  in  65 
cans.  So  that  if  you  add  the  5,592  and  the  158  that  we  carried 
over,  we  had  5,570  and  we  snipped  5,525  ;  that  gave  us  225  pounds 
of  milk  wasted  and  everything  that  was  not  shipped.  That  is  the 
truth,  these  figures  just  as  you  have  got  them  there.  That  left  us 
225  pounds  of  milk  for  two  days'  work,  the  20th  and  21st.  Then 
we  had  85  pounds  of  cream  out  of  that. 

Mr.  Ward. — You  never  got  that  85  pounds  out  of  the  225  pounds 
of  milk,  did  you  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Some  of  it  came  out  of  the  pasteurizer. 

Mr.  Ward. — As  a  matter  of  fact,  if  you  had  that  cream  at  85 
pounds,  subtract  that  from  the  225,  you  have  only  140  pounds 
left  that  you  did  not  ship  to  New  York. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir ;  we  got  some  of  this  from  the  pasteurizer, 
but  we  didn't  get  any  skimmed  milk  from  the  pasteurizer  and  we 
didn't  have  any  cans  of  skimmed  milk  left  on  the  20th  and  21st 
from  those  figures.  All  those  figures  are  correct.  I  will  sign  my 
name  on  the  sheet.  Some  of  this  cream  we  shipped  came  off  the 
milk  that  went  into  cheese. 

Assemblyman  Law. — About  how  much  cream  comes  out  of  a  40 
quart  can  of  milk  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. — About  8  quarts,  7  or  8  quarts  with  the  skimmer. 
Assemblyman  Law. —  I  mean  in  going  through  the  pasteurizer. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  I  couldn't  say  how  much ;  there  is  a  very  little ; 
it  is  the  last  end  in  running  out  where  the  coil  does  not  touch  it. 

Senator  Wicks. —  Have  you  got  to  tip  the  runway  or  something  ? 
Mr.  Dexter. —  Well,  it  is  just  as  it  was  set  up. 

Assemblyman  Grant. —  Do  you  think  you  got  anywhere  near  all 
the  cream  where  you  dipped  it  off  the  can  like  that  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  No,  sir ;  I  don't. 


630 


Assemblyman  Grant. —  Then  there  is  a  big  waste  when  you  skini 
that  way  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  There  is  a  waste,  yes,  sir.    I  will  not  swear  that 
the  cans  on  which  I  used  the  dipper  were  not  sent  to  New  York. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr.  Dexter,  you  know 
that  they  were,  don't  you  ? 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Some  of  them  might  have  been. 

Mr.  Ward. —  iSome  of  them  were  and  you  know  it,  don't  you ; 
tell  us  frankly  because  that  helps  a  man  and  he  feels  relieved. 

Mr.  Dexter. —  Yes,  sir. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  128 
Month  of  July,  1916 


Date 
1.. 
2.. 
3.  . 
4.. 
5.. 

6.  . 

7.  ., 
8... 
9... 

10... 

11.  ., 

12.  •.. 

13.  .. 

14.  .. 
15... 
16... 
17... 
18.  .. 
19... 
20..  . 
21.  .. 
22..  . 
23..  . 
24.  .. 
25... 

26.  .. 

27.  .. 
28..  . 
29... 
30.  .. 
31.. 


Number 

Milk 

Cream 

pounds 
received 

shipped, 
cans 

shipped, 
cans 

7,004 

55 

6,872 

55 

6,887 

55 

"i 

6,742 

55 

6,854 

55 

"i 

6,682 

95 

.... 

6,529 

55 

6,665 

55 

.... 

6,678 

, 

.... 

6,422 

55 

. 

6,538 

55 

1 

6,114 

55 

.... 

6,363 

55 

. 

6,051 

55 

"i 

5,795 

55 

i 

5,469 

52 

.... 

5,430 

51 

i 

5,565 

50 

.... 

5,773 

46 

i 

5,428 

62 

5,592 

65 

i 

5,409 

66 

i 

5,574 

65 

.... 

5,171 

64 

i 

5,323 

63 

.... 

5,560 

65 

i 

5,581 

65 

.... 

5,614 

64 

i 

5,462 

64 

.... 

5,456 

64 

i 

5,281 

62 

.... 

631 

EXHIBIT  NO.  129 
Month  of  August,  1916,  to  date 

Number  Milk  Cream 

pounds  shipped,  shipped, 

Date                                                      received  cans  cans 

1..                                                          5,222  62  1 

2 5,279  62 

3 5,211  60  1 

4 5,180  60 

5 4,587  53 

6 4,760  56  

7 4,502  53  1 

8 4,454  52  

NATIONAL  DAIRY  CO.  (OHER), 

(CHAS.  OHER,  Owner), 
C.  E.  DEXTER,  Superintendent, 

Wampsville,  N.  Y." 

CHRISTIAN  OHEB,  called  before  the  Committee  and  sworn  as 

a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  live  at  158  Eagle  street,  Brooklyn.  I  am  in  the  milk  busi- 
ness and  nave  been  for  twenty  years.  I  have  two  stations,  one  at 
Wampsville,  Madison  county,  and  one  at  Hecla,  Oneida  county. 
A  man  by  the  name  of  0.  Brown  is  in  charge  of  my  station  at 
Wampsville.  He  has  been  there  only  a  few  months.  Before  that, 
Charles  Dexter  had  charge  of  it.  I  don't  know  where  he  is  now. 
I  discharged  him  about  two  months  ago  because  he  didn't  suit  any 
more.  I  simply  wanted  to  make  a  change.  He  was  not  satisfactory 
because  he  told  a  lie  right  before  this  Committee  at  Oneida.  I 
saw  it  in  the  paper.  I  sold  the  milk  I  got  from  Wampsville.  I 
have  ten  wagons  and  handle  about  110  cans  a  day.  I  handle  a 
little  cream,  as  a  rule.  I  sell  it  in  quart  jars  bottled  and  pasteur- 
ized. I  get  it  all  from  those  two  stations.  If  I  found  the  Hecla 
man  had  lied  to  the  Committee  I  would  probably  discharge  him. 
I  saw  about  the  Wampsville  station  in  the  New  York  papers.  Our 
company  is  called  the  National  Dairy  Company.  I  got  a  report 
from  the  Wampsville  station  of  what  I  wanted  to  know ;  not  each 
day.  I  know  how  much  milk  I  bought,  I  got  it  on  the  isheet.  At 
the  end  of  the  month  he  sent  down  his  accounts.  The  only  way 
I  know  what  milk  was  bought  each  day  was  from  the  freight  ticket. 

Mr.  Ward. —  In  what  way  did  your  man  Dexter  lie  about  tha 
business  before  this  Committee,  as  you  gathered  from  the  news- 
papers ? 


632 

Mr.  Oher. —  Because  he  says  that  he  separates  cream.  He  never 
did  no  such  thing.  He  didn't  get  any.  I  didn't  authorize  him 
to  do  it.  He  didn't  ship  any  to  me  when  I  wanted  him  to.  I  can- 
not tell  that  what  he  said  was  false.  He  did  say  he  made  cream. 
Yes,  he  made  cream.  Certainly  he  did  make  cream.  I  didn't  dis- 
charge Dexter  because  he  said  he  made  cream  in  the  Wampsville 
station.  He  told  the  truth  in  that  respect. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Well,  what  did  you  discharge  him  for  ? 

Mr.  Oher. —  Because  —  well  he  didn't  suit  me  any  more.  I  had 
a  right  to  discharge  him. 

Mr.  Ward. —  But  we  want  to  know  why  he  didn't  suit. 
Mr.  Oher.—  He  didn't  suit. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  can  appreciate  that  he  didn't  suit,  but  we  want 
to  know  what  you  considered  unsatisfactory. 

Mr.  Oher. —  A  whole  lot  of  mays. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Didn't  you  discharge  him  because  he  told  this 
Committee  the  truth  ? 

Mr.  Oher. —  Xo,  sir;  I  didn't  discharge  him  for  that.  That 
didn't  have  anything  to  do  with  it ;  I  am  quite  sure  of  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  What  did  you  discharge  him  for ;  you  haven't  told 
us  yet? 

Mr.  Oher. —  Because  he  said  that  in  his  statement,  he  said  he 
used  up  the  skim  milk  and  told  I  had  told  him  so,  didn't  he  ?  He 
told  'the  Committee  he  was  using  the  skim  milk  up  in  cheese,  didn't 
he  ?  He  said  he  made  it  into  cheese ;  he  said  that  you  forced  it 
out  of  him ;  if  he  would  tell  the  truth,  he  would  be  easier.  I  dis- 
charged him  because  he  said  this  what  I  didn't  tell  him. 

Mr.  Ward.—  What  did  he  say  that  you  didn't  tell  him  ? 
Mr.  Oher.—  That  I  did  not  —  what  I  didn't  tell  him  ? 
Mr.  Ward.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Oher. —  I  told  him  —  he  said  that  you  said  that  he  made 
the  milk  into  cheese. 


633 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  didn't  discharge  him  for  saying  that  I  said 
that  he  had  made  the  milk  into  cheese ;  you  didn't  discharge  him 
for  that  ?  You  didn't  care  what  I  said  ? 

Mr.  Oher. —  I  didn't  want  him  any  more;  that  is  why  I  dis- 
charged him ;  that  is  as  far  as  I  go ;  I  cannot  go  further  if  I  will 
tell  you.  He  told  me  a  lie ;  that  is  as  far  as  I  can  tell  you ;  if  you 
don't  go  any  farther  I  cannot  go  any  farther. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  mean  if  I  don't  tell  you  what  you  discharged 
him  for  ? 

Mr.  Oher. — N"o,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  That  was,  you  discharged  him  because  he  told  us 
the  truth.  Can  you  agree  to  that  ? 

Mr.  Oher. —  That  he  told  you  the  truth  ? 
Mr.  Ward.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Oher. —  I  told  him  to  make  cream.  I  got  some  cream.  I 
got  some  milk. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  the  record  shows  that  the  cans  of  milk  that 
were  shipped  you  were  just  equal  to  the  cans  you  bought,  plus  the 
cream. 

Mr.  Oher. —  I  don't  know  about  that. 

Mr.  Ward. —  We  were  puzzled  to  know  where  the  cans  of  cream 
came  from  and  so  was  he. 

Mr.  Oher. —  I  don't  know  where  he  got  it  from.  That  is  more 
than  I  know.  I  couldn't  tell  you  whether  or  not  he  went  out  and 
bought  it  out  of  his  own  pocket;  I  don't  know  where  he  got  it 
from. 

Mr.  Ward. —  He  said  he  got  it  out  of  the  cooler.  You  know 
that. 

Mr.  Oher. — I  don't  know  anything  about  it.  I  sold  all  the 
cream  he  shipped  me  on  my  wagons  over  in  Brooklyn  and  all  the 
milk  he  shipped  me. 


634 

Mr.  Ward. —  His  records  show  that  he  shipped  you  all  the  milk 
he  bought  and  when  you  came  to  pay  the  bills  at  the  end  of  the 
month  you  knew  whether  he  asked  you  to  pay  for  more  than  he 
had  shipped  you. 

Mr.  Oher. —  If  he  had,  I  would  want  to  know  what  it  was.  I 
didn't  pay  at  the  end  of  the  month  for  more  milk  than  had  been 
brought  down  here.  I  know  I  paid  for  just  what  I  got  on  the 
railroad. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  conclude  from  the  foregoing  evidence  and 
exhibits  that  the  National  Dairy  Company  was  illegitimately 
extracting  cream  from  the  milk  handled  by  it  and  selling  the 
remainder  of  the  milk  as  whole  milk.  It  is  evident  to  the  Com- 
mittee that  Mr.  Dexter  lost  his  job  with  the  National  Dairy  Com- 
pany solely  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  in  the  end  he  preferred  to 
admit  the  truth. 

The  Middle  'States  Creamery  Company  is  located  at  Canastota 
in  Madison  county.  The  Committee  secured  from  the  records  of 
this  company  the  daily  report  for  the  month  of  February,  1916, 
which  is  marked  "  138,"  was  identified  and  established  as  being 
the  original  record  of  that  company.  It  appears  from  an  examina- 
tion of  this  record  that  from  milk  shipped  as  market  milk  certain 
quantities  of  cream  were  first  taken.  The  columns  of  quarts 
shipped  in  cans  and  cream  shipped  are  stated  to  contain  quantities 
shipped  as  whole  milk  and  shipped  as  cream  for  market  milk 
purposes. 


635 


EXHIBIT  No.   138 

MIDDLE  STATES  CREAMERY  COMPANY,  CANASTOTA,  N.  Y. 
Daily  Report 


Month, 
Feb. 

Stock 

Re- 
ceipts 

Total 

Quarts 
shipped 
in  cans 

Whole 
con- 
densed 

Cream 
40% 

Skim 

Waste 
and 
shrink- 
age 

Total 

Bal- 
ance 

Actual 
stock 

1 

8,449 

2,474 

10  923 

10  760 

60 

43 

10  863 

60 

60 

2  

60 

8,419 
2,440 

10  919 

6  480 

2  067 

238 

2  186 

Over 
52 

10  971 

3... 

8,424 

2,426 

10  S'Sft 

Goon 

21  ";n 

240 

2  200 

Over 
20 

10  870 

4     . 

8,377 

2,400 

10  777 

8  360 

2  173 

63 

181 

10  777 

5     . 

8,348 

* 

2,315 

10  663 

6  720 

280 

2,968 

695 

10,663 

6 

8,421 

2,465 

10  886 

8  640 

2  173 

62 

H 

10  ,  886 

7 

8  121 

2,330 

10  451 

7  320 

3  100 

80 

Over 
49 

10  500 

8  

8,651 

2,393 

11  044 

8  420 

2  173 

37 

14 

10  644 

400 

400 

9  

400 

8,504 
2,350 

11  254 

9  040 

1  908 

53 

253 

11,254 

10  

8,544 
2,385 

10,929 

7,880 

252 

2,815 

Over 
18 

10,947 

11   .. 

8  455 

2,426 

10  881 

7  480 

40 

21 

7  541 

3  340 

3  340 

12  

3,340 

8,431 
2,408 

14  179 

5  880 

3  180 

200 

1  879 

11  139 

3  040 

3  040 

13  

3,040 

8,462 
2,404 

13  906 

3  680 

600 

6,706 

10,986 

2  920 

2  920 

14  

2,920 

8,325 
2,364 

13  609 

3  400 

2Q68 

360 

3  841 

10  559 

3  040 

3040 

15 

3  040 

8  614 

2,  360 

r  14  014 

3  040 

682 

3  132 

10  854 

3  160 

3  160 

16  

3,160 

8,506 
J2.413 

[  14  079 

7  120 

630 

6  329 

14  079 

17.... 

8  731 



F  ••' 

2,472 

"  1  1  203 

6  720 

o  968 

1 

115 

9  803 

1  400 

1  400 

18 

1  400 

8  603 

2^414 

12  417 

5  280 

560 

6,097 

11  937 

480 

480 

19  

480 

8,745 
2,528 

11  753 

5  320 

520 

5,753 

11  593 

160 

160 

20  

160 

8,571 
2,425 

11  156 

6  480 

3  021 

135 

1  210 

10  846 

310 

310 

21  

310 

8,382 
2,396 

11  088 

7  900 

228 

2,915 

45 

11  088 

22  



8,516 
2,557 

11  073 

4  960 

2  067 

375 

3,671 

11  073 

23  



8,909 
2,528 

11,437 

8,080 

3,180 

46 

131 

11,437 

636 


EXHIBIT  No.  138  —  (Continued) 


Quarts 

Whole 

Waste 

Month, 
Feb. 

Stock 

Re- 
ceipts 

Total 

shipped 
in  cans 

con- 
densed 

Cream 
40% 

Skim 

and 
shrink- 

Total 

Bal- 
ance 

Actual 
stock 

age 

24  .. 

8,888 

2,512 

11  400 

8  000 

359 

3  591 

U4on 

25 

8  945 





2,591 

11  536 

8  340 

2  750 

34 

112 

11  536 

26  

8,734 

2,604 

11,338 

6,360 

406 

4  572 

11  338 

27  .. 

8  083 

2,440 

10,523 

6  160 

3  259 

40 

9  459 

1  064 

1  064 

28  

1,584 

5,911 

6,775 

5,840 

95 

1,007 

33 

6,975 

29 

11  400 

4,009 

15  40C 

2  000 

3  354 

560 

5  596 

11  510 

3  899 

3  899 

JOHN  EOFF,  being  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
"  I  am  the  superintendent  of  the  Middle  States  Creamery  Com- 
pany at  Canastota.  It  is  a  stock  company  consisting  of  different 
stockholders.  The  president  of  the  company  is  Charles  Cook  of 
Brooklyn,  N".  Y.  The  other  stockholders  are  R.  H.  Brandley  and 
J.  B.  Bedford  of  Brooklyn,  and  myself.  The  directors  are  Mr. 
Cook,  Mr.  Brandley,  and  myself.  The  secretary  and  bookkeeper 
is  C.  B.  Day  of  Oneida.  He  is  not  a  stockholder.  Mr.  Cook  is  the 
president  and  treasurer.  We  make  condensed  milk  of  different 
kinds  and  make  cream.  The  cream  we  dispose  of  to  the  local  trade 
and  the  balance  ship  to  Mr.  Charles  Cook  of  Brooklyn.  He  is  in 
the  milk  business  independently  of  this  company,  under  the  name 
of  the  Cook  Milk  and  Cream  Company,  Graham  avenue  and 
Powers  street." 

C.  B.  DAY,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 

"  I  live  in  Oneida  and  I  am  the  bookkeeper  of  the  Middle  States 
Creamery  Company  of  Canastota.  In  June  we  shipped  the  milk  to 
the  Cook  Milk  and  Cream  'Company  of  Brooklyn.  We  do  not  ship 
every  day,  only  occasionally  when  we  had  any.  I  have  the  record 
here  for  July.  There  is  also  condensed,  full  condensed  and  cream 
shipped.  These  sheets  show  the  amount  of  crude  milk  that  goes 
into  the  whole  condensed  and  the  amount  we  shipped  and  the 
amount  we  made  into  skim  milk.  We  sell  our  skim  milk  condensed 
to  customers  around  central  New  York  and  elsewhere.  We  have 


637 

a  pasteurizer  and  the  milk  we  ship  to  New  York  is  whole  milk  after 
it  has  been  pasteurized.  Nothing  remains  in  the  bottom  of  the 
pasteurizer  in  our  plant;  it  all  runs  out.  You  have  our  sheet 
there,  Exhibit  138.  The  heading,  milk,  shows  the  milk  we  shipped 
and  the  cream  shipped  and  the  amount  is  made  to  balance.  If  any- 
thing is  carried  over  into  butter  that  is  carried  the  same  way.  We 
occasionally  make  butter.  This  shows  the  amount  of  cream  we 
make  and  shows  the  amount  we  have  taken  out  in  skim  milk.  Here 
is  the  cream  sheet.  We  buy  a  lot  of  skim  milk.  We  don't  buy  any- 
thing else  except  whole  milk.  We  do  not  buy  any  cream.  It  takes 
a  little  less  than  4  quarts  of  whole  milk  to  make  a  quart  of  whole 
condensed,  a  little  better,  I  think,  than  3.8  quarts.  In  this  report 
at  the  head  of  it  is  the  month,  then  the  day  of  the  month  in  the 
first  column,  and  in  the  second  column  we  put  down  the  amount  of 
stock  that  was  carried  over  from  the  previous  day  and  the  amount 
received  for  that  day.  The  total  is  in  the  fourth  column.  In  the 
fifth  column  we  put  the  amount  of  milk  we  shipped  out  in  cans. 
In  the  seventh  column  the  amount  in  quarts  that  is  made  into 
whole  condensed.  In  the  ninth,  we  put  down  the  amount  of  40 
per  cent  cream  that  we  make  and  in  the  tenth  column,  we  put  down 
the  amount  of  skim  milk  that  results.  I  keep  them  accurately  all 
through  the  year  since  that  record  was  opened.  It  was  opened  last 
October. 

Mr.  Ward. —  On  February  1st  you  had  in  all  10,923  quarts  of 
milk  and  you  shipped  10,760  quarts  to  New  York  and  you  made  60 
quarts  of  cream  and  had  43  quarts  waste. 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  shipped  to  New  York  out  of  10,923  quarts  re- 
ceived, 10,760  quarts  to  the  Cook  Milk  and  Cream  Company  and 
you  made  out  of  that  milk  the  60  quarts  of  cream. 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

JMr.  Ward. —  Did  you  separate  it;  was  it  run  through  the 
separator  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  cannot  tell  how  they  made  it  ? 


638 

Mr.  Day. —  No,  sir ;  that  is  the  way  it  was  reported  to  me  by 
the  superintendent,  Mr.  Roff. 

Mr.  Ward. —  On  the  4th,  you  received  10,777  quarts  and  you 
shipped  8,360  quarts  of  whole  milk  and  made  2,173  quarts  into 
whole  condensed  milk.  You  made  63  quarts  of  40  per  cent  cream 
and  had  a  waste  or  shrinkage  of  181  quarts,  and  that  balanced  the 
account. 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Neither  on  the  1st  or  4th,  did  you  have  any  skim 
milk. 

Mr.  Day. —  I  cannot  explain  that,  I  am  sure. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  could  you  make  60  quarts  of  cream  there  on 
the  1st  and  ship  all  the  whole  milk  to  New  York  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  I  cannot  explain  it,  I  am  sure. 

Mr.  Ward. —  The  fact  is  they  took  those  60  quarts  on  the  1st 
and  63  on  the  4th  out  of  this  whole  milk,  didn't  they  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  It  looks  that  way,  yes. 

Mr.  Ward. —  There  is  not  any  dispute  frankly  that  that  60 
quarts  of  cream  came  out  of  the  milk  that  went  to  New  York  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  No. 

Mr.  Ward. — And  that  is  true  for  each  one  of  those  days  where 
your  sheets  do  not  show  a  skim  milk  product  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  You  notice  on  those  days  the  amount  of  cream 
made  is  relatively  small,  a  can  or  a  little  over  a  can. 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  that  can  of  cream  was  just  naturally  collected 
off  of  those  other  cans  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  On  April  the  2nd,  you  received  12,943  quarts  and 
shipped  5,880  quarts  and  made  into  whole  condensed  milk  7,102 
quarts  and  you  made  80  quarts  of  cream  and  no  skim  milk.  Now, 


639 

that  80  quarts  necessarily  came  as  before  out  of  the  milk  shipped 
to  New  York  or  the  whole  condensed  milk  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. —  So  that,  really  the  whole  condensed  milk  was  not 
whole  condensed  milk  unless  the  80  quarts  were  taken  out  of  the 
New  York  shipments,  which  is  not  probable,  is  it  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  I  don't  know,  I  am  sure. 

Mr.  Ward. —  How  do  you  explain  how  they  got  those  80  quarts  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  I  cannot  explain  it,  I  am  sure ;  I  know  nothing  about 
the  operation,  of  the  plant  whatever. 

Mr.  Ward. —  It  would  look  as  though  they  were  skimming  milk, 
wouldn't  it  ? 

Mr.  Day. —  It  looks  that  way,  yes,  sir. 

(Sheet  Marked  138  and  received  in  evidence.) 

CHARLES  COOK,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified  as  fol- 
lows: 

Mr.  Ward. —  I  show  you  Exhibit  138.  Is  it  obvious  to  you  at 
a  glance  what  that  report  shows  ? 

Mr.  Cook. —  No,  sir.  These  are  the  daily  receipts ;  this  is  the 
quantity  of  cream  shipped.  The  item  of  the  6th  of  February 
shows  on  that  date  they  produced  62  quarts  of  cream  and  that  there 
was  no  skim  milk  to  offset  it. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Now,  what  we  want  to  know  is  whether  from  your 
experience  and  judgment  that  is  a  usual  and  very  customary  prac- 
tice. 

Mr.  Cook. —  I  frankly  say,  it  is  not.  Not  at  the  present  time. 
I  think  probably,  oh,  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago,  it  was.  I  don't 
believe  that  general  condition  existed  as  recent  as  eight  or  ten  years 
ago.  I  have  never  seen  the  sheet  before.  I  don't  believe  that  the 
practice  shown  by  that  sheet  existed  to  any  extent.  I  haven't  any 
doubt  as  to  what  these  sheets  reveal.  That  has  no  connection  with 
the  Cook  Milk  and  Cream  Company.  I  do  not  believe  it  is  a  general 
practice,  only  an  isolated  instance.  Of  course,  the  milk  at  that 


640 

season  of  the  year  is  abundantly  fat  so  that  it  can  stand  that  drain 
and  still  have  a  good  quality  of  market  milk  left,  but  I  do  not 
think  it  is  practiced  to  any  extent.  These  instances  would  make  it 
seem  that  those  particular  places  were  practicing  it.  That  is  more 
general  than  I  would  expect  to  find  it.  It  would  seem  that  such 
practices  would  become  known  to  the  dairymen  and  that  it  would 
result  in  a  feeling  of  unrest  and  insecurity  as  to  accurate  and  truth- 
ful dealing  between  the  dairyman  and  the  man  who  is  receiving  the 
milk.  He  would  have  a  reason  not  to  have  confidence  if  he  saw 
there  were  practices  of  that  kind  in  operation. 

CONCLUSION 

This  Committee  has  not  audited  the  station  records  of  every 
milk  company  doing  business  in  the  State.  Such  a  task  would  be 
impossible  for  this  Committee.  In  no  other  instance  did  the 
station  records  seem  to  convict  the  operator  of  these  unlawful  prac- 
tices. In  two  or  three  other  instances,  the  reluctance  of  the  station 
employees  to  produce  records  or  the  alleged  loss  of  records  leads  to 
the  suspicion  of  similar  practices. 

The  Committee,  however,  did  carefully  examine  the  station 
record  of  a  great  number  of  other  companies  besides  the  three  set 
out  in  detail  above.  Lest  from  these  three  instances  here  given  it 
may  be  assumed  that  the  conditions  therein  described  are  general 
throughout  the  State  and  in  all  milk  stations,  it  is  proper  for  the 
Committee  to  say  that  in  examining  and  checking  the  records  of 
hundreds  of  other  stations  no  such  conditions  were  revealed. 

The  Committee  found  in  the  stations  of  all  the  well-conducted 
companies  accurate  and  well  balanced  records  showing  the  amount 
of  milk  received  and  the  disposition  of  it,  and  where  cream  was 
produced  in  such  stations,  the  records  invariably  showed  not  only 
the  production  of  the  accompanying  amount  of  skim  milk,  but  the 
disposition  of  that  skim  milk  and  the  amount  of  resulting  product 
either  in  skim  milk  cheese,  casein  or  pot  cheese.  It  would  there- 
fore be  an  unjust  reflection  upon  the  integrity,  business  practices 
and  methods  of  the  great  body  of  responsible  milk  distributors  in 
the  'State  of  New  York  if  the  Committee  did  not  state  in  this  report 
the  results  of  its  examination  of  the  books,  accounts  and  daily 
records  kept  by  them.  To  enumerate  all  of  the  companies  where 


641 

the  station  records  and  books  were  found  in  absolute  balance  as 
required  by  law  under  a  careful  system  of  bookkeeping,  whose 
employees  were  able  to  show  the  disposition  of  every  pound  of  milk 
which  came  into  the  plant,  would  perhaps  be  the  best  way  of  free- 
ing such  companies  from  the  suspicions  created  by  practices  of  the 
three  companies  or  dealers  referred  to  above,  but  such  method 
in  itself  might  be  injurious  to  some  certain  companies  or  dealers 
whose  books  did  not  come  under  the  examination  of  the  Committee. 
Therefore,  it  seems  proper  to  state  that  the  above  three  instances, 
out  of  many  score  of  stations  examined,  are  the  only  ones  where 
it  can  be  asserted  from  the  records  that  illegitimate  methods  were 
practiced.  That  there  may  be  certain  other  instances  in  the  other 
concerns  or  stations  whose  records  did  not  come  under  the  examina- 
tion of  the  Committee  is  possible,  and  in  some  two  or  three  in- 
stances, probable.  In  the  great  majority  of  milk  receiving  stations 
operated  by  responsible  individuals  or  companies,  the  condition 
of  their  books  and  records  on  examination  establishes  that  such 
practices  are  not  resorted  to  in  any  way,  but  that  instead,  an  effort 
is  made  to  constantly  improve  the  butter  fat  content  of  the  milk 
supplied  to  their  customers  instead  of  robbing  it. 

PROBLEM  OF  BARN  SCORING 

The  Agricultural  Laws  of  the  State  provide  for  a  method  of 
scoring  a  dairy  barn.  In  order  that  the  report  may  not  be  barren 
of  information  upon  this  point,  we  include  herein  a  dairy  score 
card  of  the  farm  of  M.  S.  Myers  at  Barnerville,  Schoharie  county, 
made  March  22,  1911,  by  H.  S.  Smith,  an  agent  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture.  A  score  card  now  used  by  the  State  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture  is  also  shown. 

21 


642 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK— DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE 

DAIRY  SCORE  CARD 

Based  on  card  adopted  by  the  Official  Dairy  Instructors'  Association. 
(Subject  to  revision.) 

Owner  or  lessee  of  farm M.S.  Myers 

P.  O.  address,  Barnerville ;  County 

Number  of  cows 28 ..........  Number  milking 22 

Quarts  of  milk  now  being  produced  daily 225 

Product  is  retailed  by  producer  in 

Sold  at  wholesale  to  Normanskill  Dairy  Company 

For  milk  supply  of Albany 

Permit  No Date  of   inspection Mar.  22 ....  1911. 

Remarks 

H.  S.  SMITH, 
Agent. 

(Reverse  side  of  score  card) 

Score 

EQUIPMENT  Perfect    Allowed 

Cows : 

Health 1          6  1 

Apparently  in  good  health 1     

If  tester!  with  tuberculin  once  a  year  and  no  tuberculosis 
is  found,  or  if  tested  once  in  sixmonths  and  all  reacting 

animals  removed 5     ....          .... 

(If  tested  only  once  a  year  and  reacting  animals  found  and 
removed,  2.) 

Comfort 5          2  2 

Bedding 1      

Temperature  of  stable 1 

Food 2  2 

Water 2  2 

Clean  and  fresh 1      ....          .... 

Convenient  and  abundant 1      ....          .... 

Light:  four  square  feet  of  glass  per  cow 4  4 

(Three  square  feet,  3;  2  square  feet,  2;  1  square  foot,    1, 
Deduct  for  uneven  distribution.) 

Ventilation :  Automatic  system 3 

(Adjustable  windows,  1.) 

Cubic  feet  of  space  for  cow;  500  to  1,000  feet 3  3 

(Less  than  500  feet,  2;  less  than  400  feet,  1;  less  than  300 
feet,  0;  over  1,000  feet,  0.) 

Stables: 

Location  of  stable 1  2  2 

Well  drained 1  

Free  from  contaminating  surroundings 1  .... 

Construction  of  stable 

Tight,  sound  fioor  and  proper  gutter 2  .... 

Smooth,  tight  walls  and  ceiling 1  ....          .... 

Proper  stall,  tie,  and  manger 1  ....          .... 


G43 

Utensils: 

Construction  of  utensils 1  1 

Water  for  cleaning 1  1 

(Clean,  convenient  and  abundant.) 

Small-top  milking  pail 3  3 

Facilities  for  hot  water  or  steam 1  .... 

(Should  be  in  milk  house,  not  in  kitchen.) 

Milk  cooler 1  1 

Clean  milking  suits 1  .... 

Handling  of  milk: 

Location  of  milk  room 2  2 

Free  from  contaminating  surroundings 1  ....  .... 

Convenient 1  ....  .... 

Construction  of  milk  room 2  1.5 

Floor,  walls,  and  ceiling 1  ....  .... 

Light,  ventilation,  screens 1  ....  .... 

Total..  40  32.5 


Score 

METHODS  Perfect    Allowed 

Cows  and  stables: 

Cleanliness  of  cows 8              8 

Cleanliness  of  stables 6              6 

Floor 2     

Walls 1     

Ceiling  and  ledges 1  ....          .... 

Mangers  and  partitions 1  ....          .... 

Windows 1  ....          .... 

Stable  air 6              6 

Barnyard  clean  and  well  drained 2              2 

Removal  of  manure  daily  to  field  or  proper  pit 2              2 

(To  50  feet  from  stable,  1.) 

Utensils  and  milking: 

Care  and  cleanliness  of  utensils 8  7 

Thoroughly  washed  and  sterilized   in  live  steam    for  30 

minutes 5     ....          .... 

(Thoroughly  washed  and  placed  over  steam  jet,  4;  thoroughly 
washed  and  scalded  with  boiling  water,  3;  thoroughly 
washed,  notscalded,  2.) 

Inverted  in  pure  air 3     .... 

Cleanliness  of  milking .  . , 9  7 

Clean,  dry  hands 3     ....          

Udders  washed  and  dried 6     ....          .... 

(Udders  cleaned  with  moist  cloth,  4;  cleaned  with  dry 
cloth  at  least  15  minutes  before  milking,  1.) 

Handling  the  milk: 

Cleanliness  of  attendants 1  1 

Milk  removed  immediately  from  stable 2  2 

Cleanliness  of  milk  room 3  3 

Prompt  cooling  (cooled  immediately  after  milking 

each  cow) 2          .... 

Efficient  cooling;  below  50  degrees  F 5  5 

(51°  F  to  55°  F,  4;  56°  F.  to  60°  F.,  2.). 

Storagpjbelow  50°F 3  3 

(51°  to  55°,  2;  56°  to  60°,  1.) 


644: 


Transportation;  iced 

(For   jacket   or   wet   blanket    allow   2;    dry 
blanket  of  covered  wagon,  1.) 


Total 60  55 


Score  for  equipment  32.5  +  Score  for  methods  55=Final  score,  87.5. 

Note  1. — If  any  filthy  condition  is  found,  particularly  dirty  utensils,  the  total 
score  shall  be  limited  to  49. 

Note  2. — If  the  water  is  exposed  to  dangerous  contamination  or  there  is  evi- 
dence of  the  presence  of  a  dangerous  disease  in  animals  or  attendants,  the  score 
shahVbe.O.  ^  -,\  -  ' 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK— DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE 
DAIRY  SCOBE  CARD  —  1917 

Owner  or  lessee  of  farm 

P.   0.   address County 

Total  number  of  cows Number  milking 

Gallons   of   milk   produced    daily 

Product     is     sold    by     producer     in     families,     hotels,     restaurants,     stores, 

to dealer. 

For  milk  supply  of 

Permit  No Date   of   inspection ,    191 

REMARKS  : 

(Signed) 

Inspector. 

(Reverse  side  of  score  card) 

Score 
Cows  EQUIPMENT  Perfect  Allowed 

Health 6         

Apparently  in  good  health 1 

If    tested    with    tuberculin    within    a    year    and    no 
tuberculosis  is  found,  or  if  tested  within  six  months 

and    all    reacting    animals    removed 5 

(If   tested    within    a   year    and   reacting   animals   are 
found  and  removed,  3.) 

Food  (Clean  and  wholesome 1         

Water    ( clean  and  fresh) 1         .... 

Stables 

Location  of   stable 2         .... 

Well  drained 1 

Free  from  contaminating  surroundings 1 

Construction  of  stable 4         

Tight,  sound  floor  and  proper  gutter 2 

Smooth,  tight  walls  and  ceiling 1 

Proper  stall,  tie,  and  manger 1 

Provision  for  light :  Four  square  feet  of  glass  per  cow 4         

(Three  square  feet,  3;   two  square  feet,  2;  one  square 
foot,  1.     Deduct  for  uneven  distribution.) 

Bedding 1         

Ventilation 7         .... 


645 


Provision  for  fresh  air,  controllable  flue  system 3 

(Windows  hinged  at  bottom,  1.5;   sliding  windows,  1; 

other  openings,  0.5.) 

Cubic  feet    of  space  per  cow,  500  feet 3 

( Less  than  500  feet,  2 ;  less  than  400  feet,  1 ;  less  than 

300  feet,  0.) 
Provision  for  controlling  temperature 1 

Utensils 

Construction  and  conditions  of  utensils 1 

Water  for  cleaning 1 

(Clean,  convenient  and  abundant.) 

Small-top  milking  pail 5 

Milk  cooler  1 

Clean  milking  suits 1 

Milk  Room  or  Milk  House. 

Location :  Free  from  contaminating  surroundings 1 

Construction  of  milk  room 2 

Floor,  walls,  and  ceiling 1 

Light,  ventilation,  screens 1 

Separate  rooms  for  washing  utensils  and  handling  milk 

Facilities  for  steam 1 

(Hot  water,  0.5.) 


Total 40         :1^ 

Score 

Cows                            METHODS                               Perfect  Allowed 
Clean 8         

(Free  from  visible  dirt,  6.) 

Stables. 

Cleanliness  of  stables 6         

Floor 2 

Walls 1 

Ceiling  and  ledges 1 

Mangers  and  partitions 1 

Windows 1 

Stable  air  at  milking  time 5          .... 

Freedom  from  dust 3 

Freedom  from  odors 2 

Cleanliness  of  bedding 1          .... 

Barnyard 2          .... 

Clean 1 

Well  drained    1 

Removal  of  manure  daily  to  50  feet  from  stable 2         

Milk  Room  or  Milk  House. 
Cleanliness  of  milk  room 3         .... 

Utensils  and  Milking. 

Care  and  cleanliness  of  utensils 8 

Thoroughly  washed 2 

Sterilized  in  steam  for  15  minutes 3 

(Placed  over  steam  jet,  or  scalded  with  boiling  water.  .     2 
Protected  from   contamination 3 

Cleanliness   of   milking 9          .... 

Clean,  dry  hands 3 

Udders  washed  and  wiped 6 

(Udders  cleaned  with  moist   cloth,   4;    cleaned  with  dry 
cloth  or  brush  at  least  15  minutes  before  milking,  1.) 


646 

Handling  the  Milk. 

Cleanliness  of  attendants  in  milk  room 2         .... 

Milk  removed  immediately  from  stable  without  pouring  from 

pail 

Cooled  immediately  after  milking  each  cow 2         .... 

Cooled  below  50°  F 5         

(51°  to  55°,  4;  56°  to  60°,  2.) 

Stored  below  50°  F 3         

(51°  to  55°,  2;  56°  to  60°,  1.) 

Transportation  below  50°  F 2         

(51°  to  55°,  1.5;  56°  to   60°,  1.) 

(If  delivered  twice  a  day,  allow  perfect  score  for  storage 
and  transportation.) 

Total 60 

Equipment  -j-  Methods = Final  Score 

Note.  1. —  If  any  exceptionally  filthy  condition  is  found,  particularly  dirty 

utensils,  the  total  score  may  be  further  limited. 

Note  2. —  If  the  water  is  exposed  to  dangerous  contamination,  or  there  is 

evidence  of  the  presence  of  a  dangerous  disease  in  animals  or  attendants,  the 

score  shall  be  0. 

'So  far  as  the  evidence  presented  to  this  Committee  shows,  the 
scoring  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  of  dairy  farms  has  been 
barren  of  practical  result  and  from  the  lack  of  evidence  on  that 
subject  has  probably  fallen  into  general  disuse.  The  Department 
of  Health  of  the  city  of  New  York  some  years  since  undertook  the 
scoring  of  dairy  barns.  This  has  led  to  many  controversies  between 
the  dairyman,  the  station  managers  and  the  agents  of  the  depart- 
ment. Various  allegations  were  made  by  dissatisfied  dairymen 
with  the  scoring  of  the  city  inspectors.  The  Committee  endeavored 
so  far  as  possible  to  secure  all  available  evidence  as  to  the  cause 
and  reason  of  such  disputes.  Corruption  on  the  part  of  the  agent 
of  the  city  department  was  frequently  hinted  at,  but  more  often 
it  was  alleged  that  the  agent  of  the  department  was  acting  in  the 
interest  of  the  purchasing  company  to  lower  the  barn  score  to  the 
end  that  the  company  should  receive  the  milk  at  a  lower  price.  In 
those  cases  where  the  Committee  was  able  to  secure  testimony  on 
both  sides  of  the  question  and  to  confront  the  complaining  dairy- 
man with  the  inspector  and  submit  both  sides  to  cross-examination, 
the  evidence  seemed  to  establish  that  the  difficulties  arose  from  a 
misunderstanding  or  lack  of  attention  to  the  questions  involved 
by  one  side  or  the  other  to  the  controversy  and  without  sinister 
purposes  on  the  part  of  either.  The  system  of  barn  scoring  was 
complicated,  the  work  of  the  inspectors  of  the  Department  of 
Health  was  hurried,  and  they  were  required  to  cover  a  large  field. 


647 

The  dahymen  frequently  misunderstood  the  requirements  of  the 
barn  score  and  the  loss  of  ten  cents  a  hundred  pounds  frequently 
caused  a  bitter  feeling.  Nevertheless,  the  barn  score  had  come  to 
be  established  over  a  great  part  of  the  State  and  was  and  is  to  a 
considerable  extent  adhered  to  by  the  buyers  of  market  milk.  In 
examining  the  whole  question,  it  is  fair  to  say  that  as  a  whole  no 
such  extensive  complaint  or  dissatisfaction  has  arisen  as  might  well 
have  been  expected  from  so  extensive  a  work.  The  Committee  is 
satisfied  that  it  has  been  the  general  policy  of  the  Department  of 
Health  of  the  City  of  'New  York  to  bring  about  improved  condi- 
tions with  the  least  possible  friction  with  the  dairymen  and  to  use 
all  reasonable  means  to  enforce  the  regulations  without  making 
them  Unduly  burdensome.  The  city  inspection  has  been  much 
more  burdensome  and  troublesome  to  the  operators  of  the  milk 
gathering  station  than  it  has  to  the  dairymen  and  has  been  much 
more  rigidly  enforced  upon  the  milk  companies  than  upon  the 
dairymen.  The  documentary  history  of  one  of  these  controversies 
ia  shown  by  a  series  of  score  cards,  the  first  dated  December  6, 
1915  ;  the  second,  December  20,  1915  ;  the  third,  March  15,  1916 ; 
and  the  fourth,  June  12,  1916,  of  the  farm  of  Theodore  F.  Seybold 
at  Durhamville,  Oneida  county,  .N".  Y. 

DAIRYMAN'S  DUPLICATE  SCORE 

79  X-1913  File 

Equipment  4o%     Score  29 

Methods  60%     Score  39 

Perfect  dairy  100%    Score  68 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK! 

Division  of  Food  Inspection  Dairy  Report 

Inspection  No Time A.  P.  M.     Date        Dec  6          1915 

1.  Dairyman        Seybold,  Theo.  F.  Owner        Same 

2.  P.  O.  address        Durhamville  P.  O.  address  State.      . 

3 .  County        Oneida  State,         N.  Y.         Party  interviewed 

4 .  Milk  delivered  to  creamery  at .Formerly  at 

5 .  Operated  by        Levy  Dairy  Company.  Address 

6.  Distance  of  farm  from  creamery Occupied  farm  since,  life 

7.  No.  cows,         19        No.  milking,  15        No.  quarts  produced.         120 

8 .  All  persons  in  the  households  of  those  engaged  in  producing  or  handling  milk 

are free  from  all  infectious  disease.       Weekly  reports 

are  not  being  filed. 

9 .  Date  and  nature  of  last  case  on  farm 

10 .  Water  supply  for  utensils  is  from  a  well  located  at  house feet  deep 

and  apparently  pure  and  wholesome.  State  any  possible  contamination 
located  within  2CO  feet  of  source  of  water  supply  or  if  water  supply  is  not 
protected  against  surface  drainage. 

11 .  Water  supply  on  this  farm  analyzed,  191.     Result 

12.  Style  of  cow  barn;      Length,  40  feet.     Width,  30  feet.      Height  of  ceiling 

feet. 

13.  Dairy  rules  of  the  department  of  health  are  posted. 

14 .  Dairy  herd  examined  by  Burleigh  on 1915.     Report 


648 

EQUIPMENT  Perfect    Allow 

15 .  Cow  stable  is  located  on  elevated  ground  with  no  stagnant 

water,  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  or  manure  pit  within  100 

feet 1               l 

16 .  Floors,  other  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material 2              2 

17 .  Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-tight 2              2 

18 .  Cow  beds  are  of  concrete  or  planks  on  concrete 2              2 

19.  Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,   stone  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material 2               2 

20 .  Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry 2              2 

21 .  Ceiling  is  constructed  of  board  and  is  tight  and  dust  proof  2              2 

22 .  Windows,  number  seven,  total  square  feet  44,  there  is  two 

square  feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air 

space  (one  square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet,  1) 2               2 

23 .  Ventilation  consists  of square  feet  muslin  covered 

openings  or  15  square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or  slide 

windows  which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  poor,  1 ;  insufficient,  03  2 

24 .  Air  space  is cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3) 

(500  to  600,  2)  (400  to  500,  1)  (under  400,  0) 3              2 

25 .  Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in 

which  milch  cows  are  kept 2              2 

26 .  There  is  no  direct  opening  from  stable  into  silo  or  grain  pit .  .  1 

27 .  Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving  or  sick  1               1 

28 .  Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 2              2 

29.  Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1               1 

30.  Milk  house  has  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other  building  1              0 

31 .  Milk  house  has  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 1              0 

32 .  Floor  is  properly  grade  and  water-tight 1              0 

33 .  Milk  house  is  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 1              0 

34.  Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair 1               1 

35 .  Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2              2 

36 .  Milk  pails  are  not  of  the  small  mouthed  design,  top  opening 

not  exceeding  eight  inches  in  diameter.    Diameter,  14  ...  2               0 

37 .  Racks  are  not  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when  not 

in  use 2              0 

38 .  Special  milking  suits  are  not  provided 1              0 

40  29 


METHODS 

39.  Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on  1915,  which  is 

satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0 3  3 

40.  Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and 

clean 1  1 

41 .  Ceiling  is  free  from  hanging  straw,dirt  or  cobwebs 3  3 

42 .  Window  panes  are  washed  and  kept  clean 1  1 

43 .  Walls  and  ledges  are  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure  or  cobwebs          2  2 

44.  Floors  and  premises  are  free  from  dirt,    rubbish  or  decayed 

animal  or  vegetable  matter 

45 .  Cow  beds  are  clean,  dry  and  no  horse  manure  used  thereon. . .  2  2 

46.  Manure  is  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet  from 

barn,  2;  stored  less  than   100  feet  or  where  cows  can  get 

get  at  it,  0 4  4 

47 .  Liquid  matter  is  not  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  or 

around  cow  barn 

48 .  Milking  stools  are  not  clean 1  0 

49 .  Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 2  2 

50.  Cows  have  not  been  tuberculin  tested  and  all  tuberculous 

cows  removed 7  0 

51 .  Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspection          2  2 

52.  Cows  are  all  free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt.    (No. 

dirty ) 4  4 


649 

Perfect     Allcm 
53     Long  hairs  are  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  udder  and  tail .  .  1  1 

54.  Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  not  thoroughly  brushed  and 

-^        wiped  with  a  clean  damp  cloth  before  milking 3  0 

55.  All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  any  sub- 

*3        stance  in  a  state  of  putrefaction  is  not  fed 2  2 

56 .  Milking  is  done  with  dry  hands 2  2 

57 .  Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded . .  2  2 

58 .  Clothing  of  milkers  is  clean 1  1 

59.  Facilities  for  washing  hands  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow 

barn  or  milk  house  floor 2 

60 .  Milk  is  strained  at  barn  and  in  clean  atmosphere 1  1 

61 .  Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hours  after  milking  to  50  degrees 

F.,  3;  to  55  degeres  F.,  2;  to  60  degrees  F.,  1 3  1 

62 .  Ice  is  used  for  cooling  milk 1  0 

63 .  Milk  house  is  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  all  material  not 

used  in  the  handling  and  storage  of  milk 1  0 

64.  Milk  utensils  are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after 

using  and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing  solu- 
tion, not  at  night 2  0 

65 .  Utensils  are  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after  each 

using 2  0 

66 .  Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,  with  vault  and  seats  covered 

and  protected  .  .  . . ' 1  1 

60            37 
Remarks 

Duplicate  score  received. 

Dairyman. 

A.  H.  MISSILDINE, 

Inspector  of  Foods. 

(Reverse  side  of  Dairymen's  Duplicate  Score) 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

RULES  AND  REGULATIONS  WHICH  SHOULD  BE  OBSERVED  BY  DAIRYMEN  IN  THE 

CARE  OF  Cows  AND  HANDLING  OF  MILK  SHIPPED  TO  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

The  Cows 

1.  The  cows  must  be  kept  clean,  and  manure  must  not  be  permitted  to  col- 
lect upon  the  tail,  sides,  udder  and  belly  of  any  milch  cow. 

2.  The  cows  should  be  groomed  daily,  and  all  collections  of  manure,  mud  or 
other  filth  must  not  be  allowed  to  remain  upon  their  flanks,  udders  or  bellies 
during  milking. 

3.  The  clipping  of  long  hairs  from  the  udder  and  flanks  of  the  cows  is  of 
assistance  in  preventing  the  collection  of  filth  which  may  drop  into  the  milk. 
The  hair  on  the  tails  should  be  cut,  so  that  the  brush  will  be  well  above  the 
ground. 

4.  The  udders  and  teats  of  the  cow  should  be  thoroughly  cleaned  before 
milking;    this   to   be    done  by  thorough  brushing  and  the  use  of  a  cloth  and 
warm  water. 


650 

5.  To  prevent  the  cows  from  lying  down  and  getting  dirty  between  cleaning 
and  milking,  a  throat  latch  of  rope  or  chain  should    be    fastened    across   the 
stanchions  under  the  cow's  neck. 

6.  Only  feed  which  is  of  good  quality   and   only   grain   and   coarse   fodders 
•which  are  free  from  dirt  and  mould  should  be  used.     Distillery  waste  or  any 
•ubstance  in  the  state  of  fermentation  or  putrefaction  must  not  be  fed. 

7.  Cows  which  are  not  in  good  flesh  and  condition  should  be  immediately 
removed  and  their  milk  kept  separate  until  their  health  has  been  pased  upon 
by  a  veterinarian. 

8.  An  examination  by  a  veterinary  surgeon  should  be  made  at  least  once  a 
year. 

The  Stable 

9.  No  stagnant  water,  hog-pen,  privy  or  uncovered  cesspool  or  manure  pit 
•hould  be  maintained  within  100  feet  of  the  cow  stable. 

10.  The  cow  stable  should  be  provided  with  some  adequate  means  of  ven- 
tilation, either  by  the  construction  of  sufficient  air  chutes  extending  from  the 
room  in  which  the  cows  are  kept  to  the  outside  air,  or  by  the  installation  of 
muslin  stretched  over  the  window  openings. 

11.  Windows  should  be  installed  in  the  cow  barn  to  provide  sufficient  light 
(2  sq.  ft.  of  window  light  to  each  600  cubic  feet  of  air  space  the  minimum)  and 
the  window  panes  be  washed  and  kept  clean. 

12.  There  should  be  at  least  600  cubic  feet  of  air  space  for  each  cow. 

13.  Milch  cows  should  be  kept  in  a  place  which   is  used  for  no   other 
purpose. 

14.  Stable  floors  should  be  made  water-tight,  be  properly  graded  and  well 
drained,  and  be  of  some  non-absorbent  material.    Cement  or  brick  floors  are  the 
best,  as  they  can  be  more  easily  kept  clean  than  those  of  wood  or  earth. 

15.  The  feeding  troughs  and  platforms  should  be  well  lighted  and  kept  clean 
at  all  times. 

16.  The  ceiling  should  be  thoroughly  swept  down  and  kept  free  from  hang- 
ing straw,  dirt  and  cobwebs. 

17.  The  ceiling  must  be  so  constructed  that  dust  and  dirt  therefrom  shall 
not  readily  fall  to  the  floor  or  into  the  milk.    If  the  space  over  the  cows  is  used 
for  storage  of  hay,  the  ceiling  should  be  made  tight  to  prevent  chaff  and  dust 
from  falling  through. 

18.  The  walls  and  ledges  shall  be  thoroughly  swept  down  and  kept  free  from 
dust,  dirt,  manure  and  cobwebs,  and  the  floors  and  premises  be  kept  free  from 
dirt,  rubbish  and  decaying  animal  or  vegetable  matter  at  all  times. 

19.  The  cow  beds  should  be  so  graded  and  kept  that  they  will  be  clean  and 
•anitary  at  all  times. 

20.  Stables  should  be  whitewashed  at  least  twice  a  year  unless  the  walls  are 
painted  or  are  of  smooth  cement. 


651 

21.  Manure    must    be    removed  from  the"  stalls  and  gutters  at  least  twice 
daily.      This    must    not    be    done    during  milking,  nor  within  one  hour  prior 
thereto. 

22.  Manure  should  be  taken  from  the  barn,  preferably  drawn  to  the  field. 
When  the  weather  is  such  that  this  cannot  be  done,    it   should   be    stored  not 
nearer  than  200  feet  from  the  stable  and  the  manure  pile  should  be  so  located 
that  the  cows  cannot  get  at  it. 

23.  The  liquid  matter  should  be  absorbed  and  removed  daily  and  at  no  time 
allowed  to  overflow  or  saturate  the  ground  under  or  around  the  cow  barn. 

24.  Manure  gutters  should  be  from  six  to  eight  inches  deep,  and  constructed 
of  concrete,  stone  or  some  non-absorbent  material. 

25.  The  use  of  land  plaster  or  lime  is  recommended   upon    the    floors    and 
gutters. 

26.  Only  bedding  which  is  clean,  dry  and  absorbent  should  be  used,  prefer- 
ably sawdust,  shavings,  dried  leaves  or  straw.      No    horse    manure  should  be 
used  as  bedding. 

27.  The  flooring  where  the  cows  stand,  should    be    so    constructed  that  all 
manure  may  drop  into  the  gutter  and  not  upon  the  floor  itself. 

28.  The  floor  should  be  swept  daily.    This  must  not  be  done  within  one  hour 
prior  to  milking  time. 

29.  If  individual  drinking  basins  are  used  for  the  cows  they  should  be  fre- 
quently drained  and  cleaned. 

30.  All  live  stock  other  than  cows  should  be  excluded  from  the  room  in  which 
the  milch  cows  are  kept.     (Calf  or  bull  pens  may  be  allowed  in  the  same  room 
if  kept  in  the  same  clean  and  sanitary  manner  as  the  cow  beds.) 

31.  The  barnyard  should  be  well  drained,  and  should  be  as  much  sheltered 
as  possible  from  the  wind  and  cold.     Manure  should  not  be  allowed  to  collect 
therein. 

32.  A  suitable  place  in  some  separate  building  should  be  provided  for  the 
use  of  the  cows  when  sick,  and  separate  quarters  must  be  provided  for  the  cows 
when  calving. 

33.  There  should  be  no  direct  opening  from  any  silo  or  grain  pit  into  the 
room  in  which  the  milch  cows  are  kept. 

The  Milk  House 

34.  A  milk  house  must  be  provided  which  is  separated  from  the  stable  and 
dwelling.     It  should  be  located  on  elevated  ground,  with  no  hog-pen,  privy  or 
manure  pile  within  100  feet. 

35.  It  must  be  kept  clean  and  not  used  for  any  purpose  except  the  handling 
of  milk. 

36.  The  milk  house  should  be  provided  with  sufficient  light  and  ventilation, 
with  floors  properly  graded  and  made  water-tight. 

37.  It  should  be  provided  with  adjustable  sashes  to  furnish  sufficient  light 
and  some  proper  method  of  ventilation  should  be  installed. 


38.  The  milk   house   should  be   provided  with  an   ample   supply  of   clean 
water  for  cooling  the  milk,  and  if  it  is  not  a  running  supply,  the  water  should 
be  changed  twice  daily.     Also  a  supply  of  clean  ice  should  be  provided  to  be 
used  for  cooing  the  milk  to  50  degrees  within  two  hours  after  milking. 

39.  Suitable  means  should  be  provided  within  the  milk  house,  to  expose  the 
milk  pails,  cans  and  utensils  to  the  sun  or  to  live  steam. 

40.  Facilities  consisting  of  wash  basins,  soap  and  towel  should  be  provided 
for  the  use  of  milkers  before  and  during  milkng.     During  the  summer  months 
the  milk  house  should  be  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies. 

The  Milkers  and  Milking 

41.  Any  person  having  any  communicable  or  infectious  disease,  or  one  car- 
ing for  persons  having  such  disease,  must  not  be  allowed  to  handle  the  milk 
or  milk  utensils. 

42.  The  hands  of  the  milkers  must  be  thoroughly  washed  with  soap  and 
water,  and  carefully  dried  on  a  clean  towel  before  milking. 

43.  Clean  overalls  and  jumpers  should  be  worn  during  the  milking  of  the 
cows.     They  should  be  used  for  no  other  purpose,  and  when  not  in  use  should 
be  kept  in  a  clean  place  protected  from  dust. 

44.  The  hands  and  teats 'should  be  kept  dry  during  milking.     The  practice 
of  moistening  the  hands  with  milk  is  to  be  condemned. 

45.  The  milking  stools  should  be  at  all  times  kept  clean,  and  iron  stools 
are  recommended. 

46.  The  first  streams  from  each  teat  should  be  rejected,  as  this  fore  milk 
contains  more  bacteria  than  the  rest  of  the  milk. 

47.  All  milk  drawn  from  the  cows  15  days  before  or  5  days  after  parturi- 
tion should  be  rejected. 

48.  The  pails  in  which  the  milk  is  drawn  should  have  as  small  an  opening 
at  the  top  as  can  be  used  in  milking;  top  opening  preferably  not  to  exceed  8 
inches  in  diameter.     This  lessens  the  contamination  by  dust  and  dirt  during 
milking. 

49.  The  milking  should  be  done  rapidly  and  quietly,  and  the  cows  should  be 
treated  kindly. 

50.  Dry  fodder  should  not  be  fed  to  the  cows  during  or  just  before  milking, 
as  dust  therefrom  may  fall  into  the  milk. 

51.  All  milk  utensils,  including  pails,  cans,  and  dippers,  must  be  kept  thor- 
oughly clean  and  must  be  washed  and  scalded  after  each  using,  and  all  seama 
in  these  utensils  should  be  cleaned,  scraped  and  soldered  flush. 

The  Milk 

52.  Milk  from  diseased  cows  must  not  be  shipped. 

53.  The  milk  must  not  be  in  any  way  adulterated. 

54.  The  milk  as  soon  as  drawn  should  be  removed  to  the  milk  house  and 
immediately  strained  and  cowed  to  the  proper  temperature. 


653 

55.  All  milk  must  be  cooled  to  a  temperature  below  50  degrees  F.,  within 
two  hours  after  being  drawn,  and  kept:  thereafter  below  that  until  delivered 
to  the  creamery. 

56.  The  milk  should  be  strained  into  cans  which  are  standing  in  ice  water 
which  reaches  the  neck  of  the  can.     The  more  rapidly  the  milk  is  cooled,  the 
safer  it  is,  and  longer  it  will  keep  sweet.     Ice  sould  be  u?e-l  in  cooling  milk, 
as  very  few  springs  are  cold  enough  for  live  purpose. 

57.  If  aerators  are  used,  they  should  stand  where  the  air  is  free  from  dust 
or  odors,  and  on  no  account  saould  they  be  used  in  the  stable,  or  out  of  doors. 

58.  Milk  strainers  should  be  kept  clean;  scalded  a  second  time  just  before 
using,  and  if  cloth  strainers  are  used,  several  of  them  should  be  provided,  in 
order  that  they  may  be  frequently  changed  durng  the  straining  of  the  milk. 

59.  The  use  of  any  preservative  or  coloring  matter  is  adulteration,  and  its 
use  by  a  producer  or  shipper  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  exclusion  of  his 
product  from  the  City  of  New  York. 

Water  Supply 

60.  The  water  supply  used  in  the  dairy  and  for  washing  utensils-  should  be 
absolutely  free  from  contamination,  sufficiently  abundant  for  all  purposes,  and 
easy  of  access. 

61.  This  supply  should  be  protected  against  flood  or  surface  drainage. 

62.  The  privy  should  be  located  not  nearer  than  100  feet  of  the  source  of 
the  water  supply,  or  else  be  provided  with  a  watertight  box  that  can  be  re- 
moved and  cleaned,  and  so  constructed  that  at  no  time  will  the  contents  over- 
flow or  saturate  the  surrounding  ground. 

63.  The  source  of  the  water  supply  should  be  rendered  safe  against  con- 
tamination by  having  no  stable,  barn-yard,  pile  of  manure  or  other  source  of 
contamination  located  within  200  feet  of  it. 

By  Order  of  the  Board  of  Health. 
EUGENE  W.  SCHEFFER,  ERNST  J.  LEDEBLE,  Ph.  D., 

Secretary.  President. 

79  X  1913 

DAIRYMAN'S  DUPLICATE  SCORE  CARD 

File 

Equipment  40%    Score  30 

Methods  60%     Score  46 

Perfect  Dairy        100%    Score  76 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

Division  of  Food  Inspection  Dairy  Report 

Inspection  No Time,  11:25  A.  P.  M.        Date,  June  12,  1915 

1 .  Dairyman        Seybold,  Theo.  F.  Owner,         Same 

2.  P.  O.  address,         Durhamville.  P.  O.  address,         State. 

3.  County,  Oneida;         State,  New  York.         Party  interviewed,  C.  Reynolds, 

T.  Seybold. 

4.  Milk  delivered  to  Creamery  at  State  Bridge.         Formerly  at 

5 .  Operated  by  Levy  Dairy  Company.        Address,  19th  street  and  Avenue  13 

6.  Distance  of  farm  from  creamery,  one-half  mile.         Occupied  fram  since  .  .  . 

7.  Number  cows,  15     Number  milking,  15     Number  quarts  produced,  150 

8 .  All  persons  in  households  of  those  engaged  in  producing  or  handling  milk 

are  free  from  all  infectious  disease.   Weekly  reports  are  not  being  filed. 

9 .  Date  and  nature  of  last  case  on  farm 


654 


10 .  Water  supply  for  utensils  is  from  a  well,  located  at  house,  feet  deep 

and  apparently  is  pure  and  wholesome.  State  and  possible  contamina- 
tion located  within  200  feet  of  source  of  water  supply  or  if  water  supply 
is  not  protected  against  surface  drainage 

11 .  Water  supply  on  this  farm  analyzed 191 Result 

12.  Style  of  cow  barn,  oblong.       Length,  40  feet.       Width,  30  feet. 

Height  of  ceiling,  8  feet. 

13 .  Dairy  rules  of  the  Department  of  Health  are  posted. 

14 .  Dairy  herd  examined  by  Farr,  on  1916.      Report 

EQUIPMENT 

Perfect      Allow 

15 .  Cow  stable  is  located  on  elevated  ground  with  no  stagnant 

water,  hog-pen,  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  or  manure  pit 

within  100  feet 1  1 

16 .  Floors,  other  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non-ab- 

sorbent material 2  2 

17 .  Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-tight 

18 .  Cow  beds  are  of  concrete  or  planks  laid  on  concrete 2  2 

19 .  Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,  stone  or  some  non-absorb- 

ent material , 2 

20.  Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry.  . 

21 .  Ceiling  is  constructed  of  board  and  is  tight  and  dust  proof  2 

22.  Windows,  number  7,  total  square  feet,    36;    there  •  is    two 

square  feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air 

space  (one  square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet,  1) 2  2 

23 .  Ventilation  consists  of  four  square  feet  muslin  covered  open- 

ings or  20  square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or  slide          3  3 

windows which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  poor,  1; 

insufficient,  0 3  2 

24 .  Air  space  is  600  cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3)  (500  to 

600,  2)  (400  to  500,  1)  (under  400,  0) 3  3 

25 .  Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in 

which  milch  cows  are  kept 2  2 

26 .  There  is  no  direct  opening  from  stable  into  silo  or  grain  pit 

27 .  Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving 'or  sick          1 

28 .  Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 

29 .  Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1  1 

30.  Milk  house  has  no  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other 

building 1  0 

31 .  Milk  house  none,  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 0 

32.  Floor  is  properly  graded  and  water-tight 0 

33 .  Milk  house  is  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 1  0 

34 .  Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair 1  1 

35 .  Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2  2 

36 .  Milk  pails  are  not  of  the  small  mouthed  design,  top  opening 

not  exceeding  8  inches  in  diameter 2  0 

37 .  Racks  are  not  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when  not 

in  use 0 

38 .  Special  milking  suits  are  not  provided 1  0 


METHODS 

39.  Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on  1915,  which  is 

satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0 

40.  Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and 

clean 

41 .  Ceiling  is  free  from  hanging  straw,  dirt  or  cobwebs 

42.  Window  panes  are  washed  and  kept  clean 

43.  Walls  and  ledges  are  not  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure  or 

cobwebs .  . 


40 


30 


655 

Perfect    Allow 

44 .  Floors  and  premises  are  free"  from  dirt,  rubbish  or  decayed 

animal  or  vegetable  matter 2  2 

45 .  Cow  beds  are  clean,  dry  and  no  horses  manure  used  thereon.  2  2 

46.  Manure  is  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet  from 

barn,  2;  stored  less  than  100  feet  or  where   cows  can  get 

atit,0 4  4 

47.  Liquid  matter  is  not  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  or 

around  cow  barn 2  2 

48 .  Milking  stools  are  not  clean 1  0 

49.  Cows  have  not  been  tuberculin  tested  and  all  tuberculous 

cows  removed 7  0 

50 .  Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 2  2 

51 .  Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspec- 

tion    2  2 

52 .  Cows  are  all  free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt.    (Number 

dirty.. ) 4  4 

53.  Long  hairs  are  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  duder  and  tail  1  1 

54 .  Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  not  thoroughly  brushed  and 

wiped  with  a  clean  damp  cloth  before  milking  3  0 

55 .  All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  and  sub- 

stance in  a  state  of  putrefaction  is  not  fed 2  2 

56 .  Milking  is  done  with  dry  hands 2  2 

57 .  Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded .  .  2  2 

58 .  Clothing  of  milkers  is  clean 1  1 

59 .  Facilities  for  washing  hands  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow 

barn  or  milk  house 2  2 

60 .  Milk  is  strained  at  barn  floor  and  in  clean  atmosphere 1  1 

61 .  Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hours  after  milking  to  50  degrees 

F.,  3;  to  55  degrees  F.,  2;  to  60  degrees  F.,  1;  night's  milk 

only 3  1 

62 .  Ice  is  used  for  cooling  milk 1  1 

63.  Milk  house  is  none,  free,  free    from    dirt,  rubbish    and    all 

material  not  used  in  the  handling  and  storage  of  milk ....  1  0 

64.  Milk  utensils  are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after 

using  and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing  solu- 
tion not  at  night 2  0 

65.  Utensils  are  not  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after 

each  using 2  0 

66 .  Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,  with  vault  and  seats  covered 

and  protected 1  1 

60  46 

"• — — 

Remarks .  . 


Duplicate  score  received. 
Signature  refused, 

Dairyman. 

A.  H.  MISSILDINE, 

Inspector  of  Foods. 


656 

(For  reverse  side  or  score  card,  see  page 


File 

DAIRYMAN'S  DUPLICATE  SCORE 

Equipment  40%     Score  29% 

Methods  60%     Score  43% 

Perfect  Dairy        100%     Score  72% 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

Division  of  Food  Inspection  Dairy  Report 

Inspection  No Time A.  P.  M.         Date,  December  20,  1915 

1.  Dairyman,  Seybold,  Theo.  F.  Owner,  Same. 

2.  P.  O.  address,  Durhamville.         P.  O.  address, State 

3 .  County,  Oneida.         State,  New  York.         Party  interviewed,  A.  Smith 

4 .  Milk  delivered  to  creamery  at  State  Bridge.         Formerly  at 

5.  Operated  by  Levy  Dairy  Company.         Address,  19th  street  and  Avenue  13 

6.  Distance  of  farm  from  creamery,  one-half  mile.      Occupied  since,  farm,  life. 

7.  No.  of  cows,  19.         No.  milking,  12.         No.  quarts  produced,  115. 

8 .  All    persons  in  the  households  of  those  engaged    in    producing  or  handling 

milk  are  free  from  all  infectious  disease.  Weekly  reports  are  not  being 
filed. 

9 .  Date  and  nature  of  last  case  on  farm 

10 .  Water  supply  for  utensils  is  from  a  well  located  at  house feet  deep, 

and  apparently  is  pure  and  wholesome.  State  any  possible  contamination 
located  within  200  feet  of  source  of  water  supply  or  if  water  supply  is  not 
protected  against  surface  drainage 

11 .  Water  supply  on  this  farm  analyzed 191 ....         Result 

12.  Style  of  cow  barn:    Length,  40  feet.    Width,  30  feet.     Height  of  ceiling,  8 

feet. 

13 .  Dairy  rules  of  the  Department  of  Health  are  posted. 

14.  Dairy  herd  examined  by  Burleigh  on  1915.     Report 

EQUIPMEJST 

Perfect      Allow 

15.  Cow  stable  is  located  on  elevated  ground  with  no  stagnant 

water,  nog-pen  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  or  manure  pit 

within  100  feet 1  1 

16 .  Floors,  others  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material 2  2 

17 .  Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-  tight 2  2 

18 .  Cow  beds  are  of  concrete  or  planks  laid  on  concrete 2  2 

19.  Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,   stone  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material 2  2 

20.  Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry.  .  2  2 

21 .  Ceiling  is  constructed  of  board  and  is  tight  and  dust-proof  2  2 

22.  Windows,  number  seven;  total  square  feet,  44;  there  is  two 

square  feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air  space 

(one  square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet,  1) 2  2 

23.  Ventilation  consists  of    square  feet  muslin  covered 

openings  or  16  square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or 
slide  windows,  which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  poor,  1;  in- 
sufficient, 0 3  2 

24 .  Air  space  is  500  cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3)  (500  to 

600,  2)  (400  to  500,  2)  (under  400,  0) 3  2 

25.  Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in 

which  milch  cows  are  kept 2  2 

26 .  There  is  direct  opening  from  stable  into  silo  or  grain  pit ....  1  1 

27 .  Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving  or 

sick 1  1 

28 .  Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 2 

29 .  Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1  1 


657 

Perfect      Allow 

30 .  Milk  house  has  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other  build- 

ing    1  0 

31 .  Milk  house  has  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 1  0 

32 .  Floor  is  properly  graded  and  water-tight 1  0 

33 .  Milk  house  is  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 0 

34 .  Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair ....  1  1 

35 .  Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2  2 

36 .  Milk  pails  are  not  of  the  small  mouthed  design,  top  open- 

ing not  exceeding  eight  inches  in  diameter.   Diameter,  14  2  0 

37.  Racks  are  not  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when 

not  in  use 1  0 

38 .  Special  milking  suits  are  not  provided 1  0 

40  29 


METHODS 

39.  Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on  1915,  which  is 

satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0 3  3 

40 .  Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and 

clean 1  1 

41 .  Ceiling  is  free  from  hanging  straw,  dirt  or  cobwebs 3  3 

42 .  Window  panes  are  washed  and  kept  clean 1  1 

43 .  Walls  and  ledges  are  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure,  or  cobwebs  2  2 

44.  Floors  and  premises  are  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  or  decayed 

animal  or  vegetable  matter 2  2 

45 .  Cow  beds  are  clean,  dry  and  no  horse  manure  used  thereon          2  2 

46 .  Manure  is  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet  from 

barn,  2;  stored  less  than  100  feet  or  where  cows  can  get  at 

it,0 4  4 

47 .  Liquid  matter  is  not  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  or 

around  cow  barn 2  2 

48 .  Milking  stools  are  clean 1  1 

49 .  Cows  have  not  been  tuberculin  tested  and  all  tuberculous 

cows  removed 7              0 

50 .  Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 2 

51 .  Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspection  2              2 

52.  Cows  are  all  free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt,  (number 

dirty) 4  4 

53 .  Long  hairs  are  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  udder  and  tail  1  1 

54.  Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  not  thoroughly  brushed  and 

wiped  with  a  clean  damp  cloth  before  milking 3  0 

55.  All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  any  sub- 

stance in  a  state  of  putrefaction  is  not  fed 2 

56 .  Milking  is  done  with  ,dry  hands 

57 .  Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded . . 

58 .  Clothing  of  milkers  is  dean 1  1 

59 .  Facilities  for  washing  hands  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow 

barn  or  milk  house 

60.  Milk  is  strained  at  barn  floor,  and  in  clean  atmosphere. ...  1  1 

61 .  Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hours  after  milking  to  50  degrees 

F.,  3;  to  55  degrees  F.,  2;  to  60  degrees  F.,  1 1 

62 .  Ice  is  not  used  J or  cooling  milk 1  0 

63 .  Milk  house  is  none,  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  all  material 

not  used  in  handling  and  storage  of  milk 1  0 

64.  Milk  utensils^are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after 

using  and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing  solu- 
tion. .  2  2 


658 

Perfect 

65.  Utensils  are  not  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after 

each  using 

66 .  Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,  with  vault  and  seats  covered 

and  protected 1 


Remarks 

Duplicate  score  received 

Guar.  to 

A.  SMITH, 

Dairyman. 

A.  H.  MISSILDINE, 

Inspector  of  Foods. 

(For  reverse  side  of  score  card,  see  page ) 

File 

DAIRYMAN'S  DUPLICATE  SCORE 

Equipment  40%     Score  29% 

Methods  60%     Score  44% 

Perfect  Dairy        100%    Score  73% 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

Division  of  Food  Inspection  Dairy  Report 

Inspection  No Time A.  P.  M.        Date,  March  15,  1915 

1 .  Dairyman,  Seybold,  Theo.  F.  Owner,  Same. 

2 .  P.  O.  address,  Durham ville.        P.  O  address, State 

3.  County,  Oneida.         State,  New  York.        Party  interviewed 

4 .  Milk  delivered  to  creamery  at  State  Bridge.        Formerly  at 

5 .  Operated  by  Levy  Dairy  Company.         Address,  19th  street  and  Avenue  13 

6 .  Distance  of  farm  from  creamery,  one-half  mile.     Occupied  farm  since,  life. 

7.  No.  of  cows.  .20.  . .     No.  milking No.  quarts  produced 

8 .  All    persons  in  the  households  of  those  engaged    in    producing  or  handling 

milk  are  free  from  all  infectious  disease.  Weekly  reports  are  not  being 
filed. 

9 .  Date  and  nature  of  last  case  on  farm 

10.  Water  supply  for  utensils  is  from  a  well  located  at  house feet  deep, 

and  apparently  is  pure  and  wholesome.  State  any  possible  contamina- 
tion located  within  200  feet  of  source  of  water  supply  or  if  water  supply  is 
not  protected  against  surface  drainage 

11 .  Water  supply  on  this  farm  analyzed 191 ....         Result 

12.  Style  of  cow  barn:   Length,  40  feet.   Width,  30  feet.     Height  of  ceiling,  8 

feet. 

13 .  Dairy  rules  of  £he  Department  of  Health  are  posted. 

14.  Dairy  herd  examined  by on 191.     Report 

EQUIPMENT 

Perfect      Allow 

15 .  Cow  stable  is  located  on  elevated  ground  with  no  stagnant 

water,  hog-pen,  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  or  manure  pit- 
within  100  feet 1  1 

16 .  Floors,  others  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material : 

17 .  Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-  tight 2 

18 .  Cow  beds  are  of  concrete  or  planks  laid  on  concrete 

19.  Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,   stone  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material.  .  2  2 


659 


Perfect     'Allow 

20.  Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry.  .  2  £2 

21 .  Ceiling  is  constructed  of  board  and  is  tight  and  dust-proof          2  2 

22.  Windows,  number  seven;  total  square  feet,  45;  there  is  two 

square  feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air  space 

(one  square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet,  1) 2  2 

23.  Ventilation    consists    of    4    square    feet    muslin  covered 

openings  of  16  square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or 
slide  windows,  which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  poor,  1;  in- 
sufficient, 0 3  2 

24 .  Air  space  is  500  cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3)  (500  to 

600,  2)  (400  to  500,  1)  (under  400,  0) 3  2 

25.  Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in 

which  milch  cows  are  kept 2  2 

26 .  There  is  (2)  direct  opening  from  stable  into  silo  or  grain  pit . .  1  1 

27 .  Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving  or 

sick 1  1 

28.  Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 2 

29 .  Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1  1 

30 .  Milk  house  has  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other  build- 

ing    0 

31 .  Milk  house  has  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 0 

32 .  Floor  is  properly  graded  and  water-tight. 0 

33 .  Milk  house  is  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 0 

34 .  Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair 1 

35 .  Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2  2 

36 .  Milk  pails  are  not  of  the  small  mouthed  design,  top  open- 

ing not  exceeding  eight  inches  in  diameter.    Diameter,  11  2  0 

37.  Racks  are  not  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when 

not  in  use 2  0 

38 .  Special  milking  suits  are  not  provided 1  0 


39. 
40. 

41, 
42, 
43, 
44 

45 
46 


47. 

48. 
49. 
50 

51 

52 

53, 

54, 

55 


40 


METHODS 


Perfect 
Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on  1915,  which  is 

satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0 3 

Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and 

clean 

Ceiling  is  free  from  hanging  straw,  dirt  or  cobwebs 

Window  panes  are  washed  and  kept  clean 

Walls  and  ledges  are  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure,  or  cobwebs 
Floors  and  premises  are  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  or  decayed 

animal  or  vegetable  matter 

Cow  beds  are  clean,  dry  and  no  horse  manure  used  thereon 
Manure  is  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet  from 

barn,  2;  stored  less  than  100  feet  or  where  cows  can  get  at 

it,  0 

Liquid  matter  is  not  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  or 

around  cow  barn 

Milking  stools  are  not  clean 

Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 

Cows  have  not  been  tuberculin  tested  and   all  tuberculous 

cows  removed 

Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspection 
Cows  are  all  free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt,  (number 

dirty) 

Long  hairs  are  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  udder  and  tail 
Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  not  thoroughly  brushed  and 

wiped  with  a  clean  damp  cloth  before  milking 

All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  any  sub- 
stance in  a  state  of  putrefaction  is  not  fed 


29 


Allow 


660 

Perfect  Allow 

56 .  Milking  is  done  with  dry  hands 2  2 

57 .  Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded .  .           2  2 

58 .  Clothing  of  milkers,  is  clean 1  1 

59 .  Facilities  for  washing  hands-  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow 

barn  or  milk  house 2  2 

60.  Milk  is  strained  at  barn  floor,  and  in  clean  atmosphere 1  1 

61 .  Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hoisrs  after  milking  to.  50  degrees 

F.,  3;  to  55  degrees  F.,  2;  to  60- degrees  F.,  1 3 

62 .  Ice  is  used  for  cooling  milk 1  1 

63 .  Milk  house  is  none,  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  all  material 

not  used  in  handling  and  storage  oi  milk 1  0 

64.  Milk  utensils  are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after 

using  and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing  solur- 

tion 2  2 

65.  Utensils  are  not  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after 

each  using 2  0 

66 .  Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,,  with  vault  and  seats  covered 

and  protected 1  1 


60.  43 


Remarks 

Duplicate  score  received 


Dairyman. 

A.  H.  MISSILDINE, 

Inspector  of  Foods. 
(For  reverse  side  of  score  card,  see  page ) 

The  dairymen  complained  that  tiie  foregoing  score  cards  were 
not  just.  The  attitude  of  the  Department  of  Health  towards  this 
complaint  is  best  sfhown  perhaps  by  a  letter  from  the  department, 
produced  by  Mr.  Seyhold,  and  marled  Exhibit  134.. 

EXHIBIT  NO.  ia4. 
DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH  or  THE  CITT  OF  NEW  YORK 

BU&EA.U  OF  FOOD  AND*  DRUGS 

Centre  and  Walker  Streets,  Borough  of  Manhattan 
Lucrus  P.  BROWN,  Dvr&ctor. 

NEW  YORK,  July  22nd,  1916. 
Mr.  Theodore  F.  Seybold,  DurhamvUle,  N.  Y. 

Dear  Sir. — Replying  to  your  communication  oi  July  16th,  I  wish,  to-  inform 
you  that  dairies  drawing  milk  to  pasteurizing  plants  which  ship,  Grade  A 
pasteurized  milk  to  this  city  are  only  scored  three  times-  annually  by-  this 
department  unless  circumstances  require  more  frequent  inspections.  However, 
in  your  particular  case  Mr.  Missildine  will  ha  instructed  to  make  a  reinspeetion 
as  soon  as  possible  and  convenient,  but  it  may  be  two  or  three  weeks  before  he 
will  be  able  to  do  this  work. 

Respectfully, 

(Signed)  Lucius  P.  BROWN, 
T/Y-50.  Director. 


661 

EFFECT  OF  PASTEURIZATION  ON  DAIRY  INSPECTION 

Since  the  adoption  of  the  rule  of  uniform  pasteurization,  the 
city  has  lessened  the  number  of  farm  dairy  inspectors  and  the  city 
department  has  confined  its  operations  more  exclusively  to  the 
shipping  station  and  pasteurizing  plants,  leaving  the  dairy  inspec- 
tion to  be  done  by  the  employees  of  the  milk  station ;  requiring  the 
score  cards  to  be  kept  at  the  station  where  they  could  be  examined 
and  supervised  by  the  city  inspector  when  he  examined  the  station. 
An  example  of  the  station  work  in  this  particular  is  afforded  by 
the  following  score  card : 


BORDER'S  CONDENSED  MILK  COMPANY 

Veterinary  and  Sanitary  Inspection 

Farm  operated  by:  Cows 

Owner 

Lessee .  .  


Milking . .  .21 
Dry 

Native 

Holstein...l7 
Jersey 4 


Branch,  Cherry  Valley.. .  Date  of  examination. 

Dairyman;  C.  Steinburgh.  Veterinarian 

Inspector,  R.  B.  Wainwright. 

EQUIPMENT 

Perfect      Allow 

Cow  stable  is  located  >    elevated  ground  with  no  .stagnant  water, 
hog-pen,  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  or  mamicre  pit  within 

lOOfeet 1  1 

Floors,  other  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non-absorb- 
ent material 2  2 

Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-tight 2  2 

Cow  beds  are  of  conrcete  or  planks  laid  on  concrete 2  2 

Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,  stone  or  some  non-absorbent 

material 2  2 

Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry 2  2 

Ceiling  is  constructed  of and  is  tight  and  dust-proof          2  2 

Windows  number total  square  feet;  there  is  two  square 

feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air  space  (one 

square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet.  1) , 2  2 

Ventilation  consists  of square  leet  muslin  covered  open- 
ings or square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or 

which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  poor,  1;  insufficient,  0 3  2 

Air  space  is cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3)  (500  to 

600.  2)  (400  to  500,  1)  (under  400,  0) 3  3 

Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in  which 

milch  cows  are  kept 2  2 

There  is  direct  opening  from  stabie  into  silo  or  grain  pit 1  1 

Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving  or  sick.  . .  1  1 

Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 2  2 

Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1  1 

Milk  house  has  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other  building. .  1  1 

Milk  house  has  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 1  1 

Floor  is  properly  graded  and  water-tight 1  1 

Milk  house  is  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 1  1 

Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair 1  1 


662 

Perfect  Allow 

Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2  2 

Milk  pails  are  of  the  small  mouth  design,  top  opening  not  ex- 
ceeding eight  inches  in  diameter.    Diameter 2  .... 

Racks  are  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when  not  in  use .  .           2  2 

Special  milking  suits  are  provided 1  .... 

40        _36 

METHODS 

Perfect      Allow 
Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on   which  is 

satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0  32 

Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and  clean..  . 

Ceiling  is  free  from  hanging  straw,  dirt  or  cobwebs 3  3 

Window  panes  are  washed  and  kept  clean 

Walls  and  ledges  are  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure  and  cobwebs .  2 
Floors  and  premises  are  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  or  decayed  ani- 
mal or  vegetable  matter 

Cow  beds  are  clean,  dry  and  no  horse  manure  used  thereon .... 
Manure  is  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet  from 

barn,  2;  stored  less  than  100  feet  or  where  cows  can  get  at  it,  0  .  .  4  4 

Liquid  matter  is  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  and  around 

cow  barn 

Milking  stools  are  clean 

Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 2 

Cows  have  been  tuberculin  tested  and  all  tuberculous  cows 

removed 

Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspection. . . 
Cows  are  all    free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt.   (Number 

dirty ) 

Long  hairs  are  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  udder  and  tail 1 

Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  thoroughly  brushed  and  wiped  clean 

clean  damp  cloth  before  milking 

All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  any  substance 

in  a  state  of  putrefaction  is  fed 

Milking  is  done  with  dry  hands 

Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded 

Clothing  of  milkers  is  clean 1  1 

Facilities  for  washing  hands  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow  barn 

or  milk  house 

Milk  is  strained  at and  in  clean  atmosphere 1 

Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hours  after  milking  to  50  degrees  F.,  3; 

to  55  degrees  F.,  2;  to  60  degrees  F.,  1 

Ice  is  used  for  cooling  milk .^ 

Milk  house  is  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  all  material  not  used  in 

the  handling  and  storage  of  milk 

Milk  utensils  are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after  using 

and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing  solution 2 

Utensils  are  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after  each  using 
Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,  with  vault  and  seats  covered  and 

protected  

40  49 

Total  score .  .  100  85 


Remarks 

Branch:     Cherry  Valley. 


Dairyman,  C.  STEINBURGH. 


663 

An  inspection  of  the  same  farm  by  a  city  inspector  in  the  follow- 
ing year  is  shown  by  the  following  score  card : 

DAIRYMEN'S  DUPLICATE  SCORE 

Equipment  40%    Score  31% 

Methods  60%    Score  29% 

Perfect  Dairy        100%     Score  60% 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

Division  of  Food  Inspection  Dairy  report 

Inspection  No Time A.  P.  M.  Date,  August  28,  1916 

1.  Dairyman,  A.  S.  Steenburgh.         Owner,  C.  Steenburgh. 

2.  P.  O.  address,  Cherry  Valley.         P.  O.  address State 

3.  County,  Otsego.     State,  New  York.     Party  interviewed,  C.  Steenburgh. 

4.  Milk  delivered  to  creamery  at,  Cherry  Valley.         Formerly  at 

5 .  Operated  by  Borden's.          Address,  New  York  City. 

6  Distance  of  farm  from  creamery Occupied  farm  since,     4  years. 

7.  Number  cows,  24.  Number  milking,  20.  Number  quarts  produced,  180. 

8.  All  persons  in  the  households  of  those  engaged  in  producing  or  handling 

milk  are  free  from  all  infectious  disease.  Weekly  reports  are  none,  being 
filed. 

9.  Date  and  nature  of  last  case  on  farm,  none. 

10.  Water  supply  for  utensils  is  from  a  drill  well  located, feet  deep  and 

apparently  is  pure  and  wholesome.  State  any  possible  contamination 
located  within  200  feet  of  source  of  water  supply  or  if  water  supply  is  not 
protected  against  surface  drainage 

11 .  Water  supply  on  this  farm  analyzed 191 ....     Result 

12.  Style  of  cow  barn:    Length,  70  feet;  width,  32  feet;  height  of  ceiling,  7  feet. 

13 .  Dairy  rules  of  the  department  are  posted. 

14.  Dairy  herd  examined  by on 191 .  . .  .Report  filed 

Perfect      Allow 

15 .  Cow  stable  is  not  located  on  elevated  ground  with  no  stag- 

nant water,  hog-pen,  privy,  uncovered  cesspool  of  manure 

pit  within  100  feet 1  0 

16.  Floors,  other  than  cow  beds,  are  of  concrete  or  some  non- 

absorbent  material 2  2 

17.  Floors  are  properly  graded  and  water-tight 2  2 

18.  Cow  beds  are  of  concrete  or  planks  laid  on  conrcete 2  2 

19.  Drops  are  constructed  of  concrete,  stone  or     some  non- 

absorbent  material 2  2 

20.  Drops  are  water-tight  and  space  beneath  is  clean  and  dry. .  2  2 

21 .  Ceiling  is  constructed  of  wood  and  is  not  tight  and  dust- 

proof  2  0 

22.  Windows  Number  14;  total  square  feet,  6;  there  is  2  square 

feet  of  window  light  for  each  600  cubic  feet  air  space  (1 

square  foot  per  each  600  cubic  feet,  1) 2  2 

23 .  Ventilation  consists  of  ....  square  feet  muslin  covered  open- 

ings or  12  square  feet  open  chutes  in  ceiling  or 

which  is  sufficient,  3;  fair,  2;  or  poor,  1;  insufficient,  0.  ...  3  1 

24 .  Air  space  is  600  cubic  feet  per  cow  (600  and  over,  3)  (500  to 

600, 2)  (400to500, 1)  (under  400,  0) 3  3 

25 .  Live  stock,  other  than  cows,  are  excluded  from  rooms  in 

which  milch  cows  are  kept 2  2 

26.  There  is  no  direct  opening  from  stable  into  silo  or  grain  pit  1  1 

27 .  Separate  quarters  are  provided  for  cows  when  calving  or  sick  1  1 

28.  Cow  yard  is  properly  graded  and  drained 2  2 

29.  Water  supply  for  cows  is  unpolluted  and  plentiful 1  1 

30.  Milk  house  has  no  direct  opening  into  cow  barn  or  other 

building 1  1 


664 

Perfect     Allow 

31 .  Milk  house  has  sufficient  light  and  ventilation 1  1 

32.  Floor  is  properly  graded  and  water-tight 1  1 

33 .  Milk  house  is  not  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies 1  0 

34.  Milk  pails  are  of  smoothly  tinned  metal  in  good  repair ....  1  1 

35 .  Milk  pails  have  all  seams  soldered  flush 2  2 

36 .  Milk  pails  are  not  of  the  small  mouthed  design,  top  opening 

not  exceeding  eight  inches  in  diameter.    Diameter,  1 ....  2  0 

37 .  Racks  are  provided  to  hold  milk  pails  and  cans  when  not  in 

use 2  2 

38 .  Special  milking  suits  are  not  provided 1  0 


METHODS 


40  31 


39 .  Stable  interior  painted  or  whitewashed  on,  not  lately,  which 

is  satisfactory,  3;  fair,  2;  unsatisfactory,  1;  never,  0 "3  2 

40.  Feeding  troughs,  platforms  or  cribs  are  well  lighted  and 

clean 1  1 

41 .  Ceiling  is  not  free  from  hanging  straw,  dirt  or  cobwebs ....  3  0 

42 .  Window  panes  are  not  washed  and  kept  clean 1  0 

43.  Walls  and  ledges  are  not  free  from  dirt,  dust,  manure  or 

cobwebs 2  0 

44 .  Floors  and  premises  are  not  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  or  de- 

cayed animal  or  vegetable  matter 2  0 

45 .  Cow  beds  are  not  clean,  dry  and  no  horse  manure  used 

thereon 2  0 

46.  Manure  is  not  removed  to  field  daily,  4;  to  at  least  100  feet 

from  barn,  2;  stored  less  than  100  feet  or  where  cows  can 

get  at  it,  0 4  0 

47.  Liquid  matter  is  not  allowed  to  saturate  ground  under  or 

around  cow  barn 2  2 

48 .  Milking  stools  are  not  clean 1  0 

49 .  Cow  yard  is  clean  and  free  from  manure 2  2 

50.  Cows  have  not  been  tuberculin  tested  and  all  tuberculous* 

cows  removed 7  0 

51 .  Cows  are  all  in  good  flesh  and  condition  at  time  of  inspection          2  2 

52.  Cows  are  all  free  from  clinging  manure  and  dirt.    (Number 

dirty) 4  4 

53 .  Long  hairs  are  not  lately  kept  short  on  belly,  flanks,  udder 

and  tail 1  0 

54.  Udder  and  teats  of  cows  are  not  thoroughly  brushed  and 

wiped  with  a  clean  damp  cloth  before  milking 3  0 

55.  All  feed  is  of  good  quality  and  distillery  waste  or  any  sub- 

stance in  state  of  putrefaction  is  not  fed 2 

56 .  Milking  is  done  with  dry  hands 

57 .  Fore  milk  or  first  few  streams  from  each  teat  is  discarded . .  2  2 

58 .  Clothing  of  milkers  is  clean 1  1 

59.  Facilities  for  washing  hands  of  milkers  are  provided  in  cow 

barn  or  milk  house 2  2 

60 .  Milk  is  strained  at and  in  clean  atmosphere 1  1 

61 .  Milk  is  cooled  within  two  hours  after  milking  to  50  degrees 

F.,  3;  to  55  degrees  F.,  2;  to  60  degrees  F.,  1 3 

62 .  Ice  is  used  for  cooling  milk 1  1 

63 .  Milk  house  is  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  all  material  not  used 

in  the  handling  and  storage  of  milk 1  1 

64.  Milk  utensils  are  rinsed  with  cold  water  immediately  after 

using  and  washed  clean  with  hot  water  and  washing 

solution .  .  22 


665 

65.  Utensils  are  not  sterilized  by  steam  or  boiling  water  after 

each  using ". 2  0 

66 .  Privy  is  in  sanitary  condition,  with  vault  and  seats  covered 

and  protected 1  1 


60  29 


Remarks,  C.  Steenburgh. 
Duplicate  score  received . 


Dairyman. 

Inspector  of  Foods. 

INSPECTION  OF  MILK  GATHERING  STATIONS  AND  PASTEURIZING 

PLANTS 

Under  the  present  mode  of  operation,  of  the  'City  Department  of 
Health,  the  inspection  of  pasteurizing  plants  and  equipment  in 
milk  gathering  stations  is  rigid  and  constant.  The  condition  of  the 
milk  received  at  these  plants  and  handled  by  them  is  constantly 
checked  by  the  bacterial  count  and  sediment  test.  The  form  of 
score  card  of  the  stations  is  as  follows,  although  many  other  pre- 
liminary forms  are  used : 

55  F-1912  File 

Construction  50     %            % 

Operation  50     %             % 

Perfect  score  100     %            % 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK 

Division  of  milk  inspection.  Creameryreport 

File  No luspection  No Time A.  P.  M 191 .. 

Location P.O.  address 

County State 

On R.  R Branch Miles  to  New  York 

Owner Address 

Operator Address 

Manager is  licensed  by State.    Number  of  help 

Number  of  patrons  delivering  at  present Total  number  of  patrons 

Milk  received  daily ....  pounds.  Quart  cans.  Average  butter  fat  test ....  Date . . . 

Milk  train  leaves  daily  at Arrives  at  platform  New  York  City  at .  .  A.  P.  M. 

Butter,  cheese,  casein  or  milk  sugar  are  made  in  building. 

Water  supply  is  from 

And  is  apparently  pure  and  wholesome.    Milk  is  delivered  by  farmers  at  least 

once  daily. 

All  cans  and  bottles  of  milk  are  tagged,  showing  date  and  place  of  shipment. 
All  persons  engaged  in  handling  milk  are  free  from  any  infectious  disease. 
Infectious  disease  reports  from  dairyman  are  filed  as  follows: 

Date Number  of  patrons Number  of  reports  filed 

Date Number  of  patrons Number  of  reports  filed 

Date Number  of  petrons Number  of  reports  filed 

Date Number  of  patrons Number  of  reports  filed 


666 

SHIPMENTS  TO  CUSTOMERS 

Name Address Cans  milk,  cream 

Name Address Cans  milk,  cream 

Name Address Cans  milk,  cream 

If  not  shipping  at  present,  state  disposal  of  milk  or  cream 

CONSTRUCTION 

Perfect 

Score    Allowed 

1 .  Premises  surrounding  creamery  are  in  sanitary  condition. .  .  1         .... 

2.  Receiving  room  is  partitioned  off  from  main  milkroom 2         

3 .  Wash  room  for  cans  and  utensils  is  separated  from  where 

milk  is  handled 1         .... 

4 .  Ventilators  are  installed  to  carry  steam  and  odors  to  the  out- 

side air _ 1  .... 

5 .  Milk  handling  room  is  well  lighted  by  windows 2  .... 

6 .  Walls  and  ceiling  are  sheathed  and  dust-tight 2  .... 

7 .  Were  painted  on which  is  satisfactory 1  .... 

8.  Floors  are  made  of  concrete,  stone;  or  some  non-absorbent 

material 5         .... 

9 .  Are  water  tight 2         

10 .  Are  so  graded  that  all  drainage  is  discharged  at  one  or  more 

points .... 

11 .  Strainers  in  floors  are  at  least  six  inches  in  diameter 1         .... 

12 .  Space  beneath  creamery  is  dry 

13 .  Drains  are  of  earthenware  or  iron 

14 .  Are  water-tight : 

15 .  Are  continuous  from  the  floor  level  to  point  of  disposal  ....  2         .... 

16 .  Are  protected  against  freezing 1         .... 

17.  Drainage  is  disposed  of  as  follows:  (land  disposal,  500  feet) 

which  is  satisfactory 5  .... 

18.  All  steam  and  water  pipes  are  painted  and  clean 1  .... 

19 .  Cooling  tanks  are  water-tight 2  .... 

20 .  Are  made  of  some  non-absorbent  material .... 

21 .  Are  supplied  with  clean  water  or  filled  with  clean  ice 1  

22.  Running  water  supply,  ample  for  the  needs  of  the  creamery, 

is  provided .... 

23 .  Privy  is  located,  which  is  satisfactory 

24 .  Privy  is  in  a  sanitary  condition,  with  vaults  and  seats,  cov- 

ered and  protected 1         .... 

25 .  Living  quarters  are  not  located  in  creamery  building .... 

50 

:z= 

OPERATION 

26 .  Weigh  vats  are  covered  when  in  use 1 

27 .  All  milk  is  properly  strained  through  dean  strainers 

28.  Milk  handling  room  is  used  exclusively  for  handling  milk .  . 

29 .  Floors  are  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  01  pools  of  drainage 

30.  All  ledges  are  clean  and  free  from  dust  and  dirt 

31 .  Milk  pumps  for  milk  can  be  readily  taken  apart 

32 .  Are  thoroughly  cleaned  daily 

33.  Milk-holding  vats  are  of  smooth-surfaced  tin 

34.  Milk  vats  are  provided  with  covers  when  in  use 

35 .  Milk  vats  are  in  good  repair 1 

36 .  All  tin  joints  are  soldered  flush 1 

37 .  Are  thoroughly  cleaned  immediately  after  use 2 

38.  Milk  cans  are  in  good  condition,  free  from  rust  and  worn 

spots 1 

39 .  Cans  and  bottles  from  city  are  returned  rinsed  and  free  from 

and  dirt .  .  1 


66T 

Perfect 
score    Allowed 

40.  Farmers'  cans  are  rinsed  and 'then  washed  with  hot  water 

and  washing  solution  before  being  returned 1         .... 

41 .  Skim  milk  is  carted  back  to  farm  in  cans  other  than  those 

used  for  whole  milk 1         .... 

42.  City  milk  cans  and  bottles  are  thoroughly  soaked  and 

rinsed  before  washing 1  .... 

43 .  Are  washed  with  hot  water  and  washing  solution 2  .... 

44 .  Are  rinsed  out  with  clean  water 1  

45.  Are  exposed  to  live  steam  for  at  least  one  minute, 

pounds  pressure  in  steam  pipes .... 

46.  Milk  is  received  at  a  temperature  below  60  degrees  F .... 

47.  Milk  is  immediately  cooled  to  below  50  degrees  F .... 

48 .  Milk  is  protected  from  dust  and  dirt  while  in  pools 2         .... 

49.  Milk  is  protected  in  handling,  mixing  or  over  aerators .... 

50.  Attendants  are  cleanly  in  handling  milk  or  utensils 2         .... 

51 .  Garments  worn  by  such  employees  are  clean 1         .... 

52.  Spitting  or  smoking  in  creamery  building  is  prohibited .... 

53 .  Building  is  fitted  with  fly  screens  during  the  summer  months          2         

54 .  Department  of  health  rules  are  posted 1         .... 

55 .  Dairy  farms  are  inspected  by  operator's  representative  at 

least  once  a  month .... 

50 

••^T^r:1" 

Remarks .  . 


Inspector  of  Foods. 
(Reverse  side  of  score  card) 
COMPLETE  LIST  OF  PATRONS 

1  31  61  91 

2  32  62  92 

3  33  63  93 

4  34  64  94 

5  35  65  95 

6  36  66  96 

7  97  67  97 

8  38  68  98 

9  39  69  99 

10  40  70  100 

11  41  71  101 

12  42  72  102 

13  43  73  103 

14  44  74  104 

15  45  75  105 

16  46  76  106 

17  47  77  107 

18  48  78  108 

19  49  79  109 

20  50  80  110 

21  51  81  111 

22  52  82  112 

23  53  83  113 

24  54  84  114 

25  55  85  115 

26  56  86  116 

27  57  87  117 

28  58  88  118 

29  59  89  119 

30  60  90  120 


668 

These  requirements  and  inspections  are  a  source  of  considerable 
annoyance  and  irritation  to  dairymen's  cooperative  plants  built 
and  equipped  to  handle  milk  for  the  New  York  market.  The  first 
problem  of  such  a  company  is  to  build  and  equip  their  station  to 
meet  the  requirements  of  the  department.  The  second  is  to  main- 
tain it  so  that  the  milk  shall  at  all  times  be  permitted  entry  into 
the  city.  As  has  been,  above  suggested  in  this  report,  if  the  dairy- 
men and  distributors  are  to  encourage  the  consumption  of  milk,  it 
is  more  to  their  interest  to  satisfy  the  consumer  that  the  product  is 
healthful  and  wholesome  than  it  is  to  the  Department  of  Health. 
Increased  consumption  is  of  direct  benefit  to  the  dairyman.  This 
increased  consumption  can  only  be  assured  if  the  consumer  is  satis- 
fied that  the  product  is  entirely  safe.  But  above  and  beyond  that, 
it  is  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the  dairymen  of  the  State  of  New 
York  that  both  the  consumers  and  the  Department  of  Health  of 
the  city  look  to  the  dairy  farmers  and  milk  stations  in  the  State  of 
New  York  as  the  only  sure  and  safe  source  of  supply  for  market 
milk  and  as  the  only  source  that  is  properly  equipped  to  afford 
them  the  desired  quality  of  market  milk.  In  that  event,  our 
farmers  have  a  virtual  monopoly  of  the  New  York  market.  There- 
fore, it  is  both  advisable  and  necessary  that  the  dairymen  of  the 
State  work  in  complete  harmony  with  the  health  officials  of  the 
various  cities  to  attain  these  desired  ends. 

OTHER  CITIES'  'SCORING-  METHODS 

Under  the  supervision  of  the  State  Department  of  Health,  the 
boards  of  health  of  various  other  cities  of  the  State  have  adopted 
scoring  and  inspection  methods.  Buffalo,  Rochester,  Syracuse, 
Utica,  Watertown,  Binghamton,  Geneva,  and  others,  have  their 
own  and  more  or  less  varying  methods.  Exhibit  87,  shows  one  of 
the  city's  score  cards. 


669 

EXHIBIT  NO  87 

Form  No 

District  No 

NEW  YORK  STATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH,  ALBANY 
Board  of  Health  of  the  City  of  Watertown,  N,  Y. 

OFFICIAL  STATE  DAIRY  SCORE  CARD 

(Indorsed  by  the  Official  Dairy  Instructors'  Association.    Subject  to  revision  at 

future  meetings.) 

Owner  or  lessee  of  farm 

P.  O.  address County 

Total  number  of  cows Number  milking Gallons  of 

milk  produced  daily 

Product  is  sold  by  producer  in  families,  hotels,  restaurants,  stores,  to 

For  milk  supply  of 

Permit  No Date  of  inspection 

Remarks .  .  


EQUIPMENT  Score 

Cows  Perfect  Allowed 

Health 6 

Apparently  in  good  health 1         .  ; .  .          .... 

*  If  tested  with  tuberculin  within  a  year  and  no 
tuberculosis  is  found,   or  if  tested  within  six 

months  and  all  reacting  animals  removed 5  . .          .... 

(If  tested  within  a  year  and  reacting  animals  are 
found  and  removed,  3.) 

Food  (clean  and  wholesome) 1         .... 

Water  (clean  and  fresh) 1         .... 

Stables 
Location  of  stable 2         .... 

Well  drained 1         ....          .... 

Free  from  contaminating  surroundings 1         ....          .... 

Construction  of  stable 4         .... 

Tight,  sound  floor  and  proper  gutter 2         ....          .... 

Smooth,  tight  walls  and  ceiling ....          

Proper  stall,  tie  and  manger 1         ....          

Provision  for  light;  four  square  feet  of  glass  per  cow 4         .... 

(Three  square  feet,  3;  2  square  feet,  2;  1  square 
foot,  1.    Deduct  for  uneven  distribution.) 

Bedding 1         .... 

Ventilation 7         .... 

Provision  for  fresh  air  controllable  flue  system ....  3         ....          .... 

(Windows  hinged  at  bottom,  1.5;  sliding  windows, 
1;  other  openings,  0.5.) 

Cubic  feet  of  space  per  cow,  500  feet 3         ....          .... 

(Less  than  500  feet,  2;  less  than  400  feet,  1;  less 
than  300  feet,  0.) 

Provision  for  controlling  temperature 1         ....          .... 

Utensils 

Construction  and  conditions  of  utensils 1  .... 

Water  for  cleaning 1  .... 

(Clean,  convenient,  and  abundant.) 

Small-top  milking  pail 5  .... 

Milk  cooler 1  .... 

Clean  milking  suits 1  .... 


670 

Score 

Perfect  Allowek 
Milk  Room  or  Milk  House 

Location,  free  from  contaminating  surroundings . .  1 

Construction  of  milk  room 2 

Floors,  walls  and  ceiling 1 

Light,  ventilation,  screens 1 

Separate  rooms  for  washing  utensils  and  handling  milk     ....  1 

Facilities  for  steam 1 

(Hot  water,  0.5.) 

Total 40 

METHODS 
Cows 

Clean 8 

(Free  from  visible  dirt.  6.) 

Stables 

Cleanliness  of  stables 6 

Floor 2 

Walls 1         '.',['. 

Ceiling  and  ledges 1 

Mangers  and  partitions 1 

Windows 1 

Stables  air  at  milking  time 5 

Freedom  from  dust 3 

Freedom  from  odors 2 

Cleanliness  of  bedding 1 

Barnyard 2 

Clean 1 

Well  drained 1         .... 

Removal  of  manure  daily  to  50  feet  from  stables 2 

Milk  Room  or  Milk  House 
Cleanliness  of  milk  room 3 

Utensils  and  Milking 

Care  and  cleanliness  of  utensils . 8 

Thoroughly  washed 2         .... 

Sterilized  in  steam  for  15  minutes 3         .... 

(Placed  over  steam  jet.  or  scalded  with  boiling 
water,  2.) 

Protected  from  contamination 3         .... 

Cleanliness  of  milking 9 

Clean,  dry  hands 3         .... 

Udders  washed  and  wiped 6         .... 

(Udders  cleaned  with  moist  cloth,  4;  cleaned  with 
dry  cloth  or  brush  at  least  15  minutes  before 
milking,  1.) 

Handling  the  Milk 

Cleanliness  of  attendants  in  milk  room 2 

Milk  removed  immediately  from  stable  without  pouring 

from  pail 2 

Cooled  immediately  after  milking  each  cow 2 

Cooled  below  50  degrees  F 5 

(51  degrees  to  55  degrees,  4;  56  degrees  to  60  de- 
grees, 2.) 


671 

Score 
Perfect  Allowed 

Stored  below  50  degrees  F 3         

(51  degrees  to  55  degrees,  2;  56  to  60  degrees,  1.) 

Transportation  below  50  degrees  F . .  2         .... 

(51  degrees  to  55  degrees,  1.5;  56  degrees  to  60 

degrees,  1.) 

(If  delivered  twice  a  day,  allow  perfect  score  for 
storage  and  transportation.) 

Total 60         

Equipment  [  methods=final  score. 

Note  1. — If  any  exceptionally  filthy  condition  is  found  particularly  dirty 
utensils,  the  total  score  may  be  further  limited. 

Note  2. — If  the  water  is  exposed  to  dangerous  contamination,  or  there  is  evi- 
dence of  the  presence  of  a  dangerous  disease  in  animals  or  attendant,  the  scora 
shall  be  0. 

*  Alternate.  If  pastuerized  by  holding  process  according  to  the  Sanitary  Code, 
Chapter  III,  Reg.  12;  score,  5. 

Inspector. 

CONFUSION  OF  METHODS 

This  situation  brings  into  the  field  various  city  inspectors  cover- 
ing the  same  dairy  section  with  confusing  and  various  regulations 
for  the  dairymen  to  follow.  When,  a  dairyman  has  adapted  himself 
to  the  Rochester  score  card,  in  mid  season,  perhaps,  he  desires  to 
change  and  comes  under  the  different  scoring  system  if  he  desires  to 
sell  milk  either  in  Buffalo  or  New  York  city.  Duplicate  inspec- 
tion covers  the  same  territory,  all  at  the  expense  of  the  people  of 
the  State. 

CONCLUSION 

A  competent  Board  of  Agriculture  and  Foods  should  take  over 
all  the  work  of  inspecting  and  scoring  dairy  barns.  No  valid 
reason  can  be  given  why  milk  that  is  condensed  as  unfit  for  the 
New  York  or  Rochester  market  should  be  sold  in  the  village  of 
2,500'  or  3,000  people,  which  perhaps  pays  less  attention  to  the 
sanitary  condition  of  the  milk  furnished  its  inhabitants. 

Neither  should  it  be  made  into  cheese.  If  it  is  poorly  cared  for 
and  inferior,  it  only  results  in  a  poor  product  in  the  cheese  factory 
and  a  lower  price.  Other  and  more  careful  dairymen  suffer. 
Thus  it  would  appear  that  the  State  should  aid  and  assist  in  the 
work  of  supervising  the  conditions  under  which  milk  is  produced 
to  the  end  that  milk  that  goes  into  food  to  be  sold  on  the  market  is 


672 

as  nearly  as  possible  of  a  uniform  grade  as  to  cleanliness  and  fit  and 
wholesome  for  food  in  any  city  or  town,  whether  offered  in  the  way 
of  market  milk  or  as1  cheese,  or  even  butter.  To  accomplish  this 
result,  it  is  necessary  that  the  health  authorities  of  the  State  agree 
on  what  should  constitute  sanitary  conditions  and  work  with  a 
State  department  towards  securing  that  standard  of  producing 
methods. 

When  this  standard  is  reached  and  maintained,  the  State  depart- 
ment can  certify  to  the  condition  of  any  dairy  farm  and  that  cer- 
tificate and  that  inspection  should  open  to  the  dairyman  every 
milk  market  in  the  State.  This  does  not  mean  in  the  end  any 
greater  expense  than  the  taxpayers  are  now  put  to  in  the  present 
disorganized  condition  of  affairs.  The  number  of  men.  now  en- 
gaged in  this  work  and  paid  by  the  taxpayers  could  do  the  work 
equally  as  effective  as  it  is  now  done  and  probably  more  effectively 
with  a  single  head  and  a  single  system.  The  saving  to  be  accom- 
plished would  provide  even  better  and  more  extended  work.  The 
dairymen  in  Chautauqua  county  would  be  under  the  same  regula- 
tion as  the  dairymen  in  St.  Lawrence  county,  and  possible  causes 
of  misunderstanding  and  harsh  feeling  removed.  The  difficulty 
with  this  proposition  is  to  convince  the  city  health  authorities  that 
the  State  department  would  seriously  and  thoroughly  do  the  work 
and  would  maintain  a  serious  and  proper  standard  for  the  produc- 
tion of  sanitary  milk.  That  problem  is  not  peculiar,  however,  to 
milk  alone.  It  applies  equally  to  drugs  and  foods  of  all  kinds.  But 
the  fear  on  the  part  of  the  city  consumer  and  city  health  authorities 
is  more  pronounced  in  regard  to  milk  because  of  the  ease  of  con- 
tamination and  the  facility  and  frequency  with  which  ill-cared 
for  milk  becomes  a  carrier  of  disease.  It  requires  a  more  rigorous 
and  careful  inspection  than  other  food  products  because  of  this 
quality,  and  if  this  desired  end  is  to  be  attained,  the  equipment 
and  administration  of  this  Department  of  State  food  supervision 
must  be  at  least  equal  to  that  now  maintained  by  the  most  careful 
city.  The  consumers  and  health  departments  in  those  cities  must 
be  satisfied  that  the  administrative  machinery  and  personnel  of 
the  proposed  S*tate  department  will  accomplish  the  desired  ends. 


673 

VALUE  OF  BARN  SCORE 

That  a  high  barn  score  does  not  ensure  pure  milk  has  been 
abundantly  established  and  is  beyond  dispute.  Low  scores  do  not 
mean  bad  milk.  High  scores  do  not  mean  good  milk.  ~No  man 
acquainted  with  the  subject  has  ever  contended  that  the  quality 
of  the  milk  was  dependent  upon  the  barn  score,  but  in  the  absence 
of  other  means  of  determining  the  quality  of  the  milk  furnished 
by  a  given  dairy  farm  the  barn  score  did  become  an  index  of  what 
might  be  expected  or  did  furnish  a  means  by  which  conditions 
could  be  watched  and  recorded  and  an  effort  made  for  improve- 
ment. That  was  all  that  the  barn  score  was  intended  to  accomplish, 
and  when  the  dairyman  once  understands  that  general  proposition 
he  will  no  longer  insist  "  the  barn  score  is  of  no  value  to  me  as  an 
individual  producer  in  determining  the  value  of  my  milk ;  I  make 
clean  milk."  The  barn  score  was  to  apply  not  to  the  careful  indi- 
vidual, but  as  a  record  of  the  whole  field  of  supply  where  its  con- 
clusions might  be  a  general  indication  and  help  for  the  general 
improvement. 

The  New  York  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  at  Geneva,  led 
probably  by  discussion  of  these  questions,  undertook  to  examine 
into  the  value  of  the  barn  score  card  and  checked  up  the  score  cards 
by  the  bacterial  test  of  quality.  They  showed  by  these  tests  that  a 
barn  score  of  56  produced  milk  with  a  bacterial  count  below  15,- 
000  ;  while  a  barn  with  a  score  of  73-  produced  milk  with  a  bacterial 
count  of  over  600,000,  and  one  with  a  score  of  79  produced  milk 
with  a  bacterial  count  of  4,000,000.  The  results  of  the  Experi- 
ment Farm  studies  are  given  in  Bulletin  !No.  398  of  the  Agricul- 
tural Experiment  Station,  and  as  the  question  is  important,  we 
include  an  extract  from  that  bulletin  with  this  report  in  order  that 
the  conclusions  reached  may  be  gathered  in  one  report.  These 
tables  also  show  interesting  variation  in  barn  score  allowances  by 
diffirent  agencies. 

NEW  USE  FOB  SCORE  CABDS 

As  a  con\nenience  in  making  comparisons,  either  in  the  same  dairy  at  dif- 
ferent time,  or  betweea  different  dairios,  the  cards  proved  very  useful  ?nd  they 
soon  became  known  to  all  students  of  dairying  and  dairy  inspectors.  Their 
common  use  as  a  guide  in  checking  up  conditions  gradually  led  to  a  belief 
that  the  cards  really  measure  the  effect  of  these  conditions  on  the  milk — a 

22 


674 

function  not  at  all  in  the  minds  of  thorfe  who  first  designed  the  system  of 
scoring.  But  with  the  increasing  demanl  for  pure  market  milk  and  with  the 
absence  of  ready,  reliable  m-3i3ures  of  milk  quality,  the  cards  acquire  the  repu- 
tation of  indexes  to  quality:  and  in  some  cases,  indeed,  they  have  been  officially 
adopted  as  the  one  moans  of  distinguishing  between  good  milk  and  poor  milk. 
That  is,  in  some  markets,  the  product  of  any  dairy  that  does  not  score  above 
a  certain  mark  on  a  certain  card  is  ixoluded  from  sale  or  given  a  low  grade 

Is  this  use  of  dairy  3':or«  curds  justified?  Investigations  made  at  'his 
station  prove  that  it  i&  not 

(Jar Is  Disagree 

In  the  first  place,  the  cards  now  in  common  use  in  this  State  do  not  agree, 
either  in  the  number  of  f.ictors  to  be  considered  or  the  relative  weight  they 
give  to  those  used.  In  consequence,  tlit  use  of  different  cards,  shnultanougJy, 
in  scoring  a  series  of  dairies  results  in  very  dissimilar  ranking  of  the  milk 
produced  by  the  various  herds;  and  some  cards  might  exclude  from  market, 
milk  well  above  the  limit  by  the  scoring  of  other  cards. 

This  was  shown  very  plainly  when  thirty-four  dairies  furnishing  milk  to  a 
small  city  were  scored  by  one  of  the  station  bacteriologists,  using  three  dif- 
ferent cards  for  each  dairy.  These  cards  were :  ( 1 )  that  adopted  by  the  Health 
Department  of  New  York  City;  (2)  the  "Official"  card  used  by  the  Dairy 
Division  of  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  endorsed  by  the  Official  Dairy 
Instructors'  Association  and  adopted  with  slight  modification  by  the  Xe\v 
York  State  Board  of  Health;  and  (3)  the  card  used  by  the  Dairy  Department 
of  the  New  York  State  College  of  Agriculture,  known  as  the  Cornell  card. 

Before  making  these  scorings  the  investigator  familiarized  himself  thor- 
oughly with  the  method  of  use  of  each  of  the  cards,  by  scoring  many  dairies 
by  each  system  when  accompanied  by  one  who  was  accustomed  to  the  use  of 
the  particular  card. 

The  results  are  best  conveyed  in  the  form  of  a  diagram  (pages  6  and  7) 
which  shows  the  rank  of  each  dairy  on  the  three  cards.  The  horizontal  lines 
in  this  graph  represent  the  average  minimum  scone  for  each  grade  of  milk 
established  by  the  regulations  of  the  New  York  State  and  New  York  City 
Boards  of  Health. 

It  is  evident  from  this  graph  that  the  Cornell  card  is  the  most  lenient. 
This  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  of  the  34  dairies,  the  total  scores  of  29  were 
high  enough  to  entitle  them  to  produce  Grade  A  or  Grade  B  milk,  while  accord- 
ing to  the  scores  on  the  Official  card  only  16  dairies  were  entitled  to  this 
privilege,  and  only  5  according  to  the  scores  on  the  New  York  City  card.  The 
Cornell  card  rates  only  5  dairies  as  Grade  C,  while  18  are  thus  rated  on  the 
Official  card  and  14  on  the  New  York  City  card.  None  of  the  dairies  scored 
below  the  exclusion  point  on  either  the  Cornell  or  the  Official  card,  while  15 
dairies  scored  below  this  point  on  the  New  York  City  card. 

It  is  further  evident  that  there  is  little  agreement  between  the  scores  ob- 
tained by  the  three  cards  when  applied  to  the  same  conditions.  In  this  inves- 
tigation, however,  there  was  an  agreement  among  the  three  cards  as  to  the 
three  dairies  which  would  be  considered  the  best  from  the  standpoint  of  scores. 
These  dairies  occupied  the  same  relative  position  on  each  card.  Beyond  this 
there  were  instances  of  Avide  variations.  The  scores  obtained  bv  the  Official 


675 

card  and  tlie  Cornell  card  agreed  as  to  the  poorest  scoring  dairy,  while  there 
was  a  slight  variation  in  the  rating  of  this  particular  dairy  on  the  New  York 
City  card.  As  will  be  seen  from  this  graph,  however,  the  variations  between 
the  scores  on  the  Official  card  and  the  Cornell  card  are  not  so  great  as  be- 
tween the  New  York  City  card  and  either  of  the  other  two.  The  greatest 
variation  found  is  in  the  case  of  Farm  27  which  scores  at  the  foot  of  the  list 
on  the  New  York  City  card  but  scores  32  points  higher  on  the  Official  card, 
rating  fifth  from  the  top,  while  the  score  on  the  Cornell  card  is  5.4  points 
higher  than  that  of  the  Official  card  and  is  37.4  points  higher  than  that  of 
the  New  York  City  card,  and  rates  thirteenth  from  the  top. 

It  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  these  comparative  scores  are  discussed  in  this 
paper  with  reference  to  the  interpretation  gained  by  the  investigator  while 
working  with  inspectors  trained  in  the  applicaton  of  the  respective  cards. 
Since  different  interpretations  exist,  it  is  quite  probable  that  other  systems 
of  cuts  than  those  used  would  give  somewhat  different  results.  It  may  be  that 
both  the  New  York  City  and  Official  cards  could  be  so  interpreted  that  the 
results  secured  would  compare  closely.  This  tendency  to  vary  the  interpre- 
tations put  upon  the  cards  is  one  of  the  weaknesses  of  all  of  the  present  score 
cards  as  a  means  of  grading  milk,  which  has  been  generally  recognized. 

The  disagreements  between  the  ranking  of  the  different  dairies  by  the  score 
card  system  and  by  this  bacterial  test  of  quality  are  many  and  extreme.  In 
the  graph  given  011  pages  6  and  7  the  numbers  a  tthe  head  of  the  columns  give 
the  order  of  the  dairies  on  the  basis  of  the  bacteria  count  of  the  evening  milk, 
of  which  samples  were  always  taken,  and  which  gives  a  better  index  to  the 
condition  of  the  milk  when  it  reaches  the  consumer  than  would  samples  of  the 
morning  milk  alone. 

Milk  from  the  first  dairy  gave  an  average  bacteria  count  of  less  than  10,000 
per  cubic  centimeter,  placing  it  with  highest  grade  milk  so  far  as  the  bacteria 
count  is  concerned;  but  this  milk  would  have  been  denied  entrance  to  the  New 
York  City  market,  since  the  rating  of  the  dairy  on  the  score  card  placed  it 
below  the  minimum  for  Grade  C  milk.  Its  rating  on  the  other  cards  was  bet- 
ter, yet  only  good  enough  to  allow  the  milk  to  be  sold  as  Grade  B  pasteurized; 
Dairy  2  was  scored  just  high  enough  on  the  City  card  to  allow  sale  of  the 
milk  as  Grade  C  and  only  a  little  better  on  the  other  cards;  yet  the  "  bacteria 
count "  was  only  55,000.  In  score  on  each  of  the  cards  this  dairy  was  only 
about  5  per  cent,  above  Dairy  34,  of  which  the  count  indicated  one  thousand 
times  as  much  bacterial  on  t  ami  nation.  Only  two  of  the  34  dairies  would  have 
satisfied  the  requirements  as  to  total  score  for  selling  Grade  A  milk  and  only 
three  others  those  for  Grade  B  milk,  while  nearly  half  of  the  dairies  would 
have  been  forbidden  to  sell  milk  in  New  York  City  in  any  form;  yet  the  "  bac- 
teria count"  indicates  that  the  milk  from  Dairies  1  and  2  was  Grade  A  raw 
and  that  from  Dairies  3  to  8  Grade  A  pasteurized. 

These  figures  show  startling  illustrations  of  the  expansion  of  good  milk 
by  score  card  rating;  and  equally  marked  examples  can  be  given  of  the 
acceptance,  by  dairy  scoring,  of  very  poor  milk,  bacteriologically  considered. 


676 


TABLE  I 

A  COMPARISON  BETWEEN  THE  BACTERIA  COUNT  OF  NIGHT  MILK  AND  THE  DAIRY 
SCORES  OF  THIRTY-FOUR  FARMS 


FARM 

NUMBKR 

PLATE  COUNT  PER  C.  C. 

NEW  YOUK  CITY  SCORE  i           OFFICIAL  SCORE           j     CORNELL 
SCORE 

P.  M.  milk 

A.  M.  milk 

Total 

Methods 

Total 

Methods   !       Total 

! 

1.. 

2 

7,580 
54,000 
98,000 
102,000 
118,000 
138.000 
148,000 
162,000 
267,000 
300,000 
313,000 
380,000 
537,000 
538,000 
570,000 
687,000 
732,000 
762,000 
777,000 
812,000 
937,000 
1,442,000 

13,000 
57,000 

34 
43 
41 
45 
36 
36 
29 
18 
35 
31 
53 
39 
57 
35 
45 
73 
38 
58 
47 
53 
40 
50 
39 
35 
55 
40 
27 
40 
50 
86 
42 
36 
38 
38 

20 
28 
25 
25 
21 
22 
26 
15 
21 
19 
24 
22 
30 
18 
22 
41 
20 
29 
29 
29 
22 
29 
23 
23 
24 
20 
14 
27 
30 
50 
18 
22 
23 
25 

56.90 
53.65 
54.90 
56.60 
49.00 
53.85 
49.45 
51.35 
56.30 
45.95 
57.20 
54.15 
55.70 
50.10 
78,90 
73.08 
50.45 
66.10 
58.65 
57.35 
50.05 
49.75 
54.95 
49.65 
64.25 
55.40 
59.00 
55.90 
58.75 
79.40 
48.95 
57.80 
49.85 
53.60 

36.35 
36.50 
35.20 
33.90 
28.45 
33,85 
29.15 
31.55 
34.40 
29.10 
36.35 
31.75 
31.90 
32.15 
29.05 
38.63 
29.25 
37.20 
34.10 
34.40 
28.65 
27.75 
32.05 
32.15 
30.60 
31.65 
37.45 
31.15 
29.70 
43.35 
28.10 
39.00 
30.20 
29.80 

430  M 
446  M 
432  M 
439  M 
428  M 
437  M 
433  M 
430  M 
433  M 
401  M 
432  M 
416  M 
442  M 
422  M 
435  M 
469  G 
436  M 
455  G 
450  G 
442  M 
429  M 
413  M 
447  M 
439  M 
451  G 
430  M 
439  M 
433  M 
451  G 
481  E 
417  M 
428  M 
436  M 
433  M 

3  
4  
5  
6 

29,666 
52,000 
21,000 
34,000 
18,000 
99,000 

7  

8 

9  
10 

11  

12 

13  
14... 
15  
16 

907,000 
165,000 
610,000 
58,000 

17  

18... 
19... 

320,000 
13,000 
67,000 
153,000 

20 

21.. 

22 

23  

1,758,000 
1,758,000 
2,700,000 
2,999,000 
3,056,000 
3,158,000 
3,167,000 

45,000 
103,000 

'ii282;666 
'"ssiooo 

24 

25  
26 

27  
28... 
29  

30 

4,180,000 
4,215,000 

31..    .. 

32... 

5,239,000 
13,356,000 
57,820,000 

163,000 
3,219,000 
1,284,000 

33  
34  

E -Excellent.         G-Good.         M-Medium. 


The  dairy  scored  highest  on  all  three  cards,  entitling  the  owner  by  a  large 
margin,  to  sell  Grade  A  milk,  raw,  was  among  the  poorest,  bacteriologically 
(No.  30),  with  a  count  of  over  4,000,000;  and  the  one  scored  second  was  only 
No.  16  by  bacteria  count.  Of  the  ten  dairies  with  the  best  score  card  records, 
eight  were  in  the  poor  half  of  the  list  by  the  bacterial  test  of  care  and  clean- 
liness. Only  one  dairy,  No.  11,  was  given  the  same  rank  by  the  cards  as  by  the 
number  of  bacteria  found. 

Conclusion 

In  so  far  as  the  quality  of  milk  can  be  determined  by  present  laboratory 
methods,  there  exists  no  relationship  between  the  quality  of  milk  and  the  dairy 
score  on  the  score  cards  now  in  use.  Milk  of  all  grades,  ranging  from  the  finest 
quality  to  the  poorest,  is  produced  in  barns  which  would  be  excluded  on  ac- 
count of  low  scores.  All  grades  of  milk  are  likewise  produced  in  the  high- 
scoring  barns. 

The  real  explanation  for  this  lack  of  relationship  between  the  scores  and  the 
bacteria  counts  cannot  be  given  as  yet  with  absolute  certainty.  The  most 
apparent  reason,  as  shown  by  investigations  made  at  this  Station,  is  that  a 


077 

In  PHI  number   of  the  items  included  on  the  score  card  have  little  or  no  effect 

f> 

upon  the  number  of  bacteria  present  in  the  milk.  In  other  words,  too  great 
emphasis  is  placed  upon  unessential  factors  in  all  of  the  score  cards  studied, 
with  a  consequent  lessened  emphasis  upon  the  factors  which  actually  do  affect 
the  milk. 

•  Some  may  contend  that  these  findings  encourage  the  production  of  milk 
under  filthy  conditions.  This  contention  will  be  raised  only  by  those  who  hold 
the  idea  that  low-scoring  dairies  are  necessarily  unsanitary  and  filthy.  Such 
conditions  have,  however,  not  been  found  to  hold  true  in  the  region  studied; 
because  low-scoring  dairies  were  found  which  vied  in  cleanliness  with  the 
most  ideal  of  the  high-scoring  dairies.  On  the  contrary,  however,  tlrese  facts 
give  decided  encouragement  to  the  intelligent  dairyman  who  finds  that  he  can 
produce  high-grade  milk  by  the  simple  observation  of  the  few  essential  factors 
of  cleanliness  and  care.  This  places  him  in  a  position  to  secure  a  greater 
profit  from  his  business  while  at  the  same  time  he  has  the  moral  satisfaction 
of  knowing  that  he  is  selling  a  high-grade  article.  Where  the  present  score 
cards  are  used,  all  dairies,  in  order  to  get  credit  for  Grade  A  milk,  are  forced 
to  an  'additional  expense  and  consequently  to  an  increased  cost  of  production. 
At  the  same  time  a  compliance  with  the  score-card  requirements  carries  with 
it  no  guarantee  that  the  quality  of  milk  will  be  improved  or  rendered  more 
safe  from  the  standpoint  of  public  health. 

The  fact  that  high-grade  milk  can  be  produced  with  simple  equipment  like- 
wise gives  encouragement  to  the  consumer  who  is  as  much  interested  in  keep- 
ing down  the  cost  of  producing  high-grade  milk  as  is  the  producer. 

None  of  the  results  secured  in  this  investigation  can  be  so  construed  as  to 
disprove  the  value  of  dairy  score  cards,  but  they  do  show  that  present  score 
cards  cannot  be  satisfactorily  used  as  a  means  of  grading  milk  according  to 
quality.  There  is  little  hope  of  designing  a  score  card  which  will  accomplish 
this  purpose  until  all  of  the  factors  which  are  thought  to  affect  the  quality 
of  milk  in  any  way  have  been  carefully  studied;  and  the  influence  of  each 
determined  and  accurately  measured.  In  this  way  the  really  important  fac- 
tors can  be  singled  out  and  given  the  proper  values  on  the  score  card. 

BACTERIAL  TESTS 

The  bacterial  test,  however,  affords  as  sure  an  index  to  the  sani- 
tary condition  of  milk  as1  science  has  yet  developed.  Dr.  Charles 
E.  North,  called  as  a  witness  before  tlie  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  live  at  Monclair,  N.  J.,  and  am  a  consulting  sanitary  expert. 
I  have  been  connected  with  milk  problems  for  about  sixteen  years 
and  am  a  member  of  the  National  Commission  011  Milk  Standards. 
This  National  Committee  on  Milk  'Standards  is  composed  of 
twenty  of  the  leading  health  authorities  and  scientific  authorities 
in  America,  especially  those  who  have  given  attention  to  the  rela- 
tion of  milk  to  the  public  health.  They  were  selected  by  the  New 
York  Milk  Committee.  This  committee  has  been  in  existence 


678 

about  five  years.  It  lias  held  meetings  annually  and  semi-annually 
vind  liasi  published  two  reports  and  a  third  report  is  about  to  be  pub- 
lished. The  commission  was  brought  into  existence  because  it  was 
observed  that  milk  regulations,  both  State  and  municipal,  were  not 
only  provincial  in  character  but  simply  lacking  in  uniformity,  with 
the  result  that  the  different  municipalities  in  the  states  each  had 
a  milk  problem  of  their  own  and  many  of  them  were  finding  solu- 
tions that  seemed  to  be  quite  antagonistic  to  the  solutions 
that  were  found  elsewhere.  The  commission  was  selected 
with  the  particular  view  of  not  overlooking  in  any  way  the  eco- 
nomic aspects  of  the  milk  problem,  while  keeping  in  mind  the 
public  health  aspects  ad  being  of  primary  importance.  In  other 
words,  they  have  tried  to  make  their  reports  cover  the  economic 
questions  as  well  as  the  public  health  questions. 

I  think  that  the  recommendations  of  the  commission  can 
best  be  summarized  by  saying  that  they  believed  that  the 
grading  of  milk  into  two  or  more  grades,  according  to  its 
sanitary  character,  is  a  principle  which  solves  the  economic 
problems  as  well  as  the  pulblic  health  problems  involved.  That 
is  to  say,  the  grading  system  is  a  financial  advantage  to  the 
producer  as  well  as  a  public  health  advantage  to  the  consumer. 
We  also  believe  it  is  of  financial  advantage  to  the  dealer 
or  distributor.  It  is  the  opinion  of  this  Committee  that  while 
local  conditions  may  make  it  necessary  to  modify  the  methods 
by  which  this  principle  of  grading  is  established  or  adopted,  yet 
the  principle  itself  is  so  sound  that  there  is  hardly  conceivable  a 
local  condition  which  cannot  be  penetrated  by  the  adoption  of  the 
system  of  grading.  I  might  say  to  you  that  a  survev  of  the  milk 
industry  five  years  ago  would  have  shown  very  clearly  that  about 
the  only  point  of  uniform  recognition,  in  the  milk  business  was  that 
all  milk  looks  white.  Outside  of  that  one  point,  there  was  no 
constant  factors  which  everybody  recognized.  The  result  was  that 
the  producers  of  milk  who  were  conscientious  and  clean  in  their 
methods  and  interested  in  keeping  the  dairy  sanitary  and  in  steri- 
lizing their  cans  and  in  keeping  their  cows  clean  and  in  using  ice 
for  refrigeration,  would  bring  milk  to  the  country  shipping  station 
and  find  when  it  was*  received  at  the  door  it  was  dumped  into  the 
same  tank  with  the  milk  of  their  next  door  neighbor  who  may  have 
a  diseased  herd  of  cattle,  who  might  use  filthy  and  unsterilized 


6T9 

utensils,  and  employ  filthy  methods,  and  yet  these  two  milks  were 
poured  into  the  same  tank  and  the  producers  were  paid  the  same 
price.  In  other  words,  there  was  no  distinction  whatever  drawn 
by  the  industry  or  the  public  between  milk  of  a  sanitary  character 
and  milk  of  an  unsanitary  character. 

This  commisssioii  believed  that  milk  is  a  commodity  which 
lends  itself  just  as  easily  to  grading  as  any  other  commodity 
in  the  market.  Butter  was  graded,  eggs-  are  graded,  all  food 
products  sold  according  to  grade,  and  the  only  reason  why 
milk  had  not  been  marketed  according  to  grade  in  the  past 
has  been  that  the  industry  and  the  health  authorities  had  no 
vay  of  measuring  or  distinguishing"  one  grade  of  milk  from 
another.  They  have  known  how  to  measure  its  butter  fat,  but  they 
have  not  known  how  to  measure  its  sanitary  character.  Now,  I 
think  that  in  the  'Commission's  report  it  has  been  made  very  clear 
that  they  believe  they  have  discovered  the  measuring  stick  by  which 
the  industry  as  well  as  the  Health  Department  can  discover  the 
difference  between  milk  of  high  sanitary  value  and  milk  of  low 
sanitary  value,  and  that  is  by  the  bacterial  test.  They  have  rescued 
the  bacterial  test  from  the  medical  research  departments  and 
dragged  it  into  the  public  view. 

What  I  refer  to  is  the  use  of  the  laboratory,  but  it  is  a  laboratory 
that  does  not  cost  more  than  $200  to  equip  and  the  employment  of 
an  operator  who  is  of  equal  intelligence  to  a  man  that  is  fit  and 
can  take  a  Babcock  test- 
That  is  being  done  now  on  a  very  large  scale  by  the  milk  indus- 
try and  those  bacterial  laboratories  are  now  dotted  all  over  the 
country  and  are  being  used  to  determine  the  difference  between  the 
milk  which  one  farmer  brings  and  the  milk  which  another  farmer 
brings  to  the  shipping  station  for  the  purpose  of  using  those  results 
as  a  basis  of  payment  'to  the  farmer.  This  system  properly  carried 
out  makes  it  possible  to  base  the  prices  to  the  producer  on  the  num- 
ber of  bacteria  contained  in  his  milk,  just  as  you  base  his  price  on 
butter  fat. 

Those  laboratories  are  located  in  a  number  of  prominent  shipping 
stations  at  the  present  time.  The  first  one  I  think  was  installed  at 
Homer  by  the  "New  York  Dairy  Demonstration  Company ;  another 
one  at  the  present  time  is  at  Rockdale,  "N:  Y.,  a  big  shipping 
station.  There  is  one  at  Fair  Haven,  Vermont;  there  are  a  num.- 


680 

ber  of  other  big  shipping  stations.    The  Sheffield  Farms  have  three 
installed  in  their  plants  at  the  present  time. 

They  make  the  bacterial  count  at  the  source  as  the  milk  comes  in. 

Of  course,  there  are  a  number  who  send  the  samples  to  New 
York  City  to  ascertain  the  bacterial  count.  They  do  not  maintain 
the  laboratories  at  the  country  station.  One  of  those  companies'  is 
the  Alexander  Campbell.  They  grade  the  farmer's  contract  that 
way.  The  farmers  are  paid  according  to  the  bacteria  test.  I  am 
operating  nine  of  these  myself  in  different  parts  of  the  country. 

They  are  usually  installed  in  one  of  the  upper  rooms  of  the 
creamery  and  are  equipped  with  simple  and  inexpensive  apparatus. 
For  instance,  instead  of  buying  an  incubator  which  laboratories 
would  use  and  which  would  cost  several  hundred  dollars,  we  use 
an  egg  incubator  which  costs'  $15  or  $20.  The  temperature  is 
maintained  close  enough  within  a  degree  and  in  that  you  can  get 
results  which  are  just  as  uniform  and  reliable  as  you  can  get  Avith 
more  expensive  medical  apparatus.  The  glass-ware  is  identical 
with  the  glass-ware  that  is  used  in  the  college  and  we  can  take  a 
high  school  boy  or  girl  who  has  been  drilled  in  this  work  for  two 
months  and  put  them  out  there  and  their  results  are  so  reliable 
that  they  can  be  depended  on.  They  can  expand  the  field  of  a 
cubic  centimeter  of  milk,  etc.,  to  make  the  count  just  as  well  as 
it  can  be  done  in  the  laboratory.  It  is  being  done  now  in  numerous 
places'  under  practical  working  conditions,  and  we  can  check  up 
their  work  with  skilled  employees  in  a  fully  equipped  medical 
laboratory.  I  am  of  the  opinion  and  I  am  also  certain  that  farmers 
who  understand  the  matter  and  have  experienced  it  are  of  the 
opinion  because  they  are  anxious  to  receive  extra  premium  for 
clean  milk,  that  every  station  that  handles  a  large  amount  of  milk 
could  maintain  and  operate  its  own  laboratory  for  the  bacteria 
count. 

The  Actual  Work  of  Bacteria  Count 

I  might  say  to  you  that  in  one  station  which  was  recently  opened 
where  fifty-eight  farmers  were  patrons,  within  four  weeks'  time 
after  the  bacteria  count  was  put  in  operation,  thirty-eight  of  those 
men  received  full  premium  for  low  bacteria  count.  It  is  easy 
for  them  to  earn  the  premium.  The  adoption  of  the  simple  sani- 
tary measures  necessary  to  keep  the  bacteria  out  of  the  milk  is  so 


681 

easy  that  it  is  within  the  reach  of  any  producer.  Equipment  is 
not  important.  Methods  is  the  only  important  item.  I  agree  fully 
with  the  New  York  State  Experiment  Farm  Bulletin.  Farmers 
with  very  high  score  under  the  old  method  produced  very  high 
'bacterial  count,  and  poor  score  produced  a  very  low  count.  The 
dairyman  and  his  methods  are  the  important  factor. 

Row  Cost  of  Production  is  Affected 

I  understand  that  this  Committee  is  primarily  interested  in  the 
question  of  cost.  Cost,  of  course,  is  a  question  of  volume.  When 
you  come  to  the  application  of  sanitation  of  milk,  once  more  you 
run  across  the  difficulty  of  volume.  If  you  take  a  given  quality  of 
milk  and  apply  first  to  it  brains  and  overhead  expense,  if  that 
quantity  is  only  30-0  quarts  a  day  you!  are  going  to  get  quite  a 
different  tax  on  each  quart  from  what  you  have  if  it  were  several 
thousand  quarts  a  day.  In  the  application  of  the  principle  to 
which  I  refer,  we  estimate  the  cost  of  cleanliness  011  the  basis  of 
applying  the  sanitary  overhead  charges  on  several  thousand  quarts 
of  milk  daily  at  one  shipping  point  through  which  we  can  exercise 
supervision  over  scores  of  dairy  farms.  That  reduces  the  tax  from 
perhaps  five  or  six  cents  a  quart  which  it  would  be  to  a  private 
farmer  over  the  market  price,  to  only  a  fraction  of  a  cent  for 
supervision.' 

For  instance,  at  a  shipping  station  with  100  farms  we  can  trans- 
form that  milk  by  these  methods  from  millions  of  bacteria  to  less 
than  ten  thousand  bacteria  count  for  less  than  half  a  cent  a  quart, 
just  because  we  have  the  volume  of  milk  to  deal  with. 

The  ordinary  dairy  farm  of  ten  of  fifteen  or  twenty  cows,  as 
ordinarily  conducted,  will  average  500,000  per  CC  under  ordinary 
conditions.  If  he  wants  to  make  milk  down  to  1 0,000'  and  get  the 
premium  he  will  have  to  change  his  equipment  from  the  ordinary 
equipment  to>  the  sanitary  equipment.  That  change  will  cost  about 
five  dollars  unless  he  is  without  ice.  If  he  is1  without  ice,  he  will 
have  to  go  to  the  expense  of  making  arrangements  for  ice.  That 
is,  if  he  is  in  a  territory  where  ice  grows,  he  must  provide  himself 
with  ice  to  make  that  kind  of  milk  the  year  round.  In  some  of  the 
states,  such  as  Pennsylvania  and  Maryland,  ice  is  difficult  to  get, 
20  the  farmers  deliver  the  milk  twice  a  day  where  they  have  no: 
got  ice. 


682 

In  other  places,  we  supply  the  ice  in  the  station  and  sell  it  to  the 
farmer  at  cost.  That  is  being  done  at  Rockdale,  1ST.  Y.,  now.  The 
Homer  Company  did  the  same  thing. 

When  I  say  an  expense  of  $5,  I  refer  to  the  purchase  of  covers 
for  milk  pails,  strainer  cloths,  etc. 

The  dairyman,  because  of  the  extra  cost  to  him  of  labor  and 
running  expense,  demands  a  premium  from  one-quarter  to  three- 
quarters1  of  a  cent  a  quart.  One  of  these  grade  A  station  in  Ver- 
mont is  paying  thirty  cents  a  can  premium  for  bacteria  under 
10, 000,  whereas  the  Homer  station  is  paying  ten  cents  a  can  for 
bacteria  count  under  10, 000.  It  is  very  difficult  to  get  a  definite 
answer  as  to  what  the  additional  cost  of  labor  will  be  to  the  farmer 
from  day  to  day,  because  it  is  not  possible  for  the  dairyman  to  get 
together  at  any  one  point  just  where  he  spends  the  extra  time.  He 
does  just  a  little  more  on  several  items.  He  will  use  a  little  more 
boiling  water;  he  will  use  a  little  more  alkali  washing  water;  he 
spends  a  little  more  time  washing  cans;  he  spends  a  little  more 
time  washing  his  hands  ;  he  spends  a  little  more  time  to  cleanse  the 
cows  a  little  cleaner.  When  he  sits  down  to  milk,  he  takes  a  little 
longer  to  milk,  because  he  is  a  little  more  careful.  He  will  use  a 
little  more  ice,  and  in  that  way  it  all  figures  a  little  more.  It  gets 
to  exercising  greater  care  all  along  the  line. 

The  real  secret  of  the  whole  thing  is  his  being  conscientious  dur- 
ing his  operations  if  the  milk  is  going  to  be  tested  when  it  gets  to 
the  station  for  bacteria,  and  he  is  going  to  be  paid  at  the  end  of  the 
month  according  to  that  test.  If  he  knows  that,  he  has  that  con- 
stant stimulus. 

The  interests  of  both  producer  and  consumer  require  that  this 
premium  for  low  bacteria  count  be  paid.  The  producer  can  make 
it,  but  the  economic  problem  that  we  have  before  us  is  what  we 
are  going  to  do  after  we  have  made  it. 

Consumer's  Duty 

I  find  that  the  producer  and  the  dealer  are  only  too  ready  to 
take  this  class  of  goods.  When,  we  come  to  sell  it,  you  have  got  to 
do  something  which  will  distinguish  that  milk  from  other  milk  you 
market  and  that  is  where  the  grading  system  comes  in.  A  grading 
system  gives  a  complete  answer  to  that  question  by  attaching  a 


683 

label  to  clean  milk.  When  you  put  a  label  and  a  stamp  on  it,  then 
you  can  identify  it.  I  believe  that  Grade  A  Pasteurized  is  the 
coming  milk.  We  think  it  is  the  household  milk  of  the  future. 

The  only  safeguard  we  have  against  bovine  tuberculosis  and  other 
diseases  is  pasteurization.  Of  course,  the  dairyman,  wants  to  keep 
disease  out  of  his  herd  because  of  the  damage  it  does  to  his  herd  and 
not  because  of  the  damage  it  does  to  the  consumer.  Every  farmer 
wants  to  keep  a  healthy  herd  because  he  needs  a  healthy  herd ;  he 
does  not  want  his1  cows  to  be  sick,  'but  the  application  of  a  universal 
tuberculin  test  would  'be  a  calamity  from  my  knowledge  of  the 
existence  of  bovine  tuberculosis.  If  all  the  tubercular  cows  were 
excluded  from  the  herd,  milk  would  be  extremely  rare,  so  that  the 
best  we  can  get  under  present  conditions  is  to  have  selected  dairies 
from  tuberculin  tested  herds  that  is  not  pasteurized.  Udder 
diseases  in  cattle  are  so  prevalent  and  common  and  so  obnoxious 
that  much  more  emphasis  must  be  laid  upon  that  question.  When 
you  have  a  disease  of  the  udder,  you  have  got  something  that  is 
going  to  go  into  the  milk  directly. 

Necessity  of  Pasteurization 

It  is  because  of  those  udder  diseases  more  perhaps  than  any  other 
class  of  diseases  that  State  legislation  should  require  pasteuriaztion. 
All  the  small  communities  of  the  State,  outside  of  New  York  city, 
are  subject  to  the  menace  of  disease®  of  the  udders  of  cattle.  You 
cannot  go  into  a  dairy  herd  that  contains  more  than  ten  cows  in 
the  State  of  New  York  without  finding  a  swollen  udder,  red,  or 
indicating  that  the.  cow  has  had  garget  or  udder  disease.  The 
bacteria  which  goes  with  that  disease  are  well  known.  They  are 
what  we  call  the  strepticocci  type,  the  same  kind  that  gives  sore 
throat  in  the  human,  l>eing  and  that  produces  tonsilitis;  we  don't 
have  to  go  so  far  as  to>  say,  septic  sore  throat,  but  the  ordinary 
types  of  sore  throat.  Chronic  throat  inflammations,  as  well  as  acute 
inflammations,  which  are  constantly  kept  up  by  absorbing  an  im pas- 
teurized milk  from  cows  which  have  these  sore  udders  and  milk 
impregnated  with  this  type  of  bacteria ;  the  old  fashioned  garget 
is  the  principal  type  of  this  disease.  'Some  authorities  go  so  far 
as  to  say  that  when  yoai  have  a  specific  epidemic,  such  as  a  septic 
sore  throat,  you  are  dealing  with  a  peculiar  disease  of  an  acute 


type,  whicli  has  been  caused  by  milk  and  that  the  bacteria  get  into 
the  milk  from  the  cow's  udder.  Nearly  everybody  up-State  that 
drinks  raw  milk  has  sore  throat.  Chronic  sore  throat  at  one  time 
or  another,  children  as  \veil  as  adults.  All  you  have  to  do  is  to  go  to 
the  throat  specialist  to  find  out  and  you  look  into  the  throat  of 
(he  average  citizen  and  you  will  find  that  the  average  person  has 
chronic  inflammation  of  some  kind,  thickening  of  the  tonsils,  or  of 
the  membrane.  It  is  the  great  American  disease,  and  the  execution 
of  the  tonsils  is  the  chronic  amusement  of  the  doctors.  Rheuma- 
tism as  we  know,  is  caused  by  infection  of  the  tonsils.  Many  of 
the  worst  inflamations  in  other  organs  of  the  body  are  caused  by 
these  throat  inflammations  which  start  in  the  tonsils.  Our  health 
authorities  were  neglectful  for  years  in  not  making  a  proper  record 
of  outbreaks  of  disease.  Whenever  we  find  an  outbreak  of  septic 
sore  throat  now,  we  look  after  the  milk  supply  and  have  traced  it, 
every  one  to  raw  milk  or  milk  which  has  not  been  properly  pas- 
teurized. I  personally  investigated  several  of  them.  In  1914,  I  in- 
vestigated one  at  Homer,  1ST.  Y. —  an  epidemic  of  septic  sore  throat, 
and  it  traced  that  to  a  dairy  of  twenty-eight  cows,  of  which  two 
cows  had  garget.  There  were  669  cases  of  the  disease  in  the  town 
of  Cortland  and  Homer.  We  found  seventy  per  cent  of  the  people 
buying  milk  from  one  firm  and  the  disease  itself,  being  contagious, 
it  was  easy  to  account  for  the  other  cases,  because  they  were  all 
connected  with  the  people  who  had  received  it  through  that  milk. 
Those  persons  were  affected  with  a  numerous  swelling  of  the 
tonsils  in  the  throat  and  copious  discharges.  The  doctors  all  diag- 
nosed the  disease  as  tonsilitis  or  sore  throat.  There  were  thirteen 
deaths.  Many  of  the  cases  after  the  sore  throat  subsided  had  attacks 
of  inflammatory  rheumatism  of  the  joints.  A  number  of  them 
had  peritonitis,  erysipelas,  appendicitis,  endocarditis,  and  other 
inflammations  which  are  well  recognized  as  following  the  inflam- 
mation of  the  tonsils.  About  the  middle  of  the  epidemic  we  began 
this  investigation.  We  promptly  put  that  milk  off  the  market, 
because  we  found  that  the  history  of  those  cases  were  closely  iden- 
tified with  that  dairy.  Nobody  believed  in  pasteurization  in  that 
town  at  that  time.  The  forty  doctors  that  attended  the  meeting 
were  unanimously  against  it,  but  they  are  all  for  it  now.  These 
cases  of  garget  in  those  cows  were  easily  discoverable  on  a  physical 


685 

examination.  Pasteurization  should  be  required  by  law  of  all 
milk  sold  in  the  State  for  household  use,  and  a  bacteria  count 
affords  a  satisfactory  standard  for  determining  the  condition  of 
milk. 

Laboratory  Service 

I  am  opposed  to  this  idea  that  the  municipalities  should  be 
encouraged  to  enlarge  their  appropriations  for  milk  inspectors  and 
send  them  out  to  dairy  farms.  The  most  efficient  system  consists 
in  the  establishment  of  a  laboratory  service  to  test  the  milk,  after 
the  milk  has  been  pasteurized,  and  you  have  ascertained  where  the 
dirty  milk  comes  from,  the  large  numbers  of  bacteria  that  it  con- 
tains. Then  only  a  small  number  of  inspectors  are  needed  because 
you  can  send  them  to  exactly  the  right  spot,  as  compared  with  the 
old  system  of  a  widespread  inspection  which  disregards  the  char- 
acter of  the  milk  that  is  coming  in,  which  is  only  an  annoyance  to 
the  farmer  and  does  not  improve  the  character  of  the  supply  appre- 
ciably, and  it  has  been  tried  for  years  and  years  without  any 
improvement  in  the  quality  of  the  milk. 

But  you  take  half  a  dozen  inspectors  working  with  the  laboratory 
and  test  the  milk  and  all  you  need  to  do  is  to  work  on  the  dirty 
milk.  This  system  also  would  check  milk  station  conditions.  The 
bacteria  test  of  the  station  milk  when  it  reaches  the  city  will  take 
care  of  that. 

State  Supervision 

It  has  been  suggested  that  the  State  might  inspect  the  dairies  and 
the  city  test  the  milk.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  is  ridiculous  to  have 
a  duplication  of  work  throughout  the  dairy  districts.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  if  you  take  a  big  shipping  station  that  happens  to  be  send- 
ing milk  to  three  or  four  cities,  for  instance,  to  Newark,  New  Jer- 
sey, Jersey  City,  and  New  York,  they  are  subject  at  the  present 
time  to  the  inspection  of  the  health  officials  and  milk  inspectors 
of  all  three  of  those  cities.  You  can  go  to  certain  farms  in  New 
York  State  and  see  the  regulations  of  these  cities  hanging  side  by 
side  in  the  barn.  I  think  that  would  all  be  eliminated  if  the  'State 
had  a  system  of  dairy  inspection  which  inspected  those  farms 
themselves.  So  far  as  the  sanitary  conditions  in  the  farms  or  con- 
cerned, that  could  well  be  done  by  the  State  authorities, 


686 

Pennsylvania  System 

That  is  already  in  farce  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania.  The 
cities  of  Pennsylvania  have  no  authority  to  inspect  dairy  farms. 
All  inspection  is  done  'by  the  State.  If  a  city  wants  to  know  any- 
thing about  the  farms  they  get  in  touch  with  the  State  and  the 
State  authorities  give  them  the  information.  The  city  authorities 
simply  test  the  milk.  They  get  their  information  or  rating  of  the 
farm  from  the  'State  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  the  health 
authorities  if  a  rating  is  unfavorable,  preclude  it.  If  the  health 
authorities  want  to  know  anything  about  a  dairy  herd,  whether  it 
is  a  single  herd  or  more  than  a  single  herd,  they  can  get  that  infor- 
mation from  the  State.  Then  if  we  check  the  milk  station  and  if 
the  milk  station  shows  ill,  we  can  exclude  the  milk  station  in  the 
city  and  then  the  milk  station  man  could  be  ordered  to  ascertain 
what  farms  are  at  fault,  and  also  the  industry  is  safeguarded  by 
having  the  consumer  adjust  his  proper  price  system  on  the  bacteria 
count. 

All  Milk  Should  be  Paid  for  on  Bacteria  Count 

All  milk  should  be  paid  for  on  this  bacteria  count  more  than  on 
the  butter  fat  test.  This  should  even  apply  if  the  milk  is  to  be 
made  for  butter.  Of  course,  in  that  case,  the  butter  fat  premium 
and  the  clean  milk  premium  should  go  hand  in  hand.  Such  butter 
necessarily  when  properly  handled  would  bring  a  higher  price." 

How  BACTERIA  ARE  COUNTED 

WILLIAM  HALLOCK  PARK,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 
"  I  am  a  director  of  the  Bureau  of  Laboratories  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Health  of  the  City  of  New  York.  At  the  present  time,  a 
part  of  the  routine  work  done  by  the  laboratories  is  determining 
the  number  of  living  bacterias  in  samples  of  milk  sent  to  the 
laboratory  by  the  Bureau  of  Foods.  We  make  several  hundred 
such  examinations  daily  and  report  those  to  the  Bureau  of  Foods, 
upon  which  action  is  taken.  Then  if  an  epidemic  develops  of 
septic  sore  throat,  we  try  and  trace  out  the  origin  of  that  epidemic 
to  some  human  being  or  some  cow  up  the  'State,  make  a  report  to 
the  Bureau  of  Foods  upon  anything  we  find.  So  we  have  the 
routine  work  of  the  daily  examination  for  the  sanitary  control  of 


687 

the  milk  and  the  special  examination  for  septic  sore  throat  or 
diptheria,  tuberculosis,  or  some  other  disease.  As  soon  as  disease 
attracts  attention  in  some  locality  we  go  to  work  at  that.  In  OUT 
routine  daily  work,  we  would  not  look  for  any  specific  type  of 
bacteria  but  purely  the  number.  Two  years  ago,  there  was  a  dis- 
cussion between  four  of  the  laboratories  in  this  city, —  the  Health 
Department  laboratory  and  thre  private  laboratories. 

The  accounts  disagreed  quite  markedly ;  the  city  laboratories  got 
figures  about  four  times  as  large  as  the  lowest  of  the  private  labora- 
tories and  so  it  was  agreed  between  these  laboratories  and  the  city 
laboratories  to  have  Professor  Kahn  of  Wesleyan  University  send 
to  us  on  different  occasions  samples  of  the  same  milk,  each  labor- 
atory getting  thirty  samples  of  the  same  milk  as  the  other  labora- 
tories, but  the  numbers  would  be  different  so  we  wouldn't  know, 
oven  if  we  wished  to,  how  to  compare  with  each  other.  We  then 
reported  to  him  our  tests,  and  the  first  time  the  difference  was  still 
quite  marked  between  laboratories.  We  found  that  was  consider- 
ably due  to  a  misinterpretation  of  the  language  in  the  report  of  the 
American  Pu'blic  Health  Association  in  which  it  said,  that  persons 
making  the  count  of  the  bacteria  could  either  use  a  lens  or  their 
eye,  leaving  it  just  that  way,  and  two  of  the  laboratories  considered 
that  that  meant  that  in  any  case  you  could  either  use  your  lens  or 
not,  while  the  report  meansi  if  you  used  a  lens  and  saw  nothing 
more  with  the  lens  than  writh  your  naked  eye,  then  you  could  use 
your  naked  eye  alone,  but  if  you  saw  more  with  the  lens,  you  should 
use  the  lens.  When  that  was  straightened  out  and  we  all  used  the 
same  lens,  that  is,  of  the  same  magnifying  power,  our  results  on 
Dr.  Kahn's  samples  very  nearly  agreed,  and  by  carefully  using  the 
same  materials  we  got  very  nearly  together.  So  we  agreed,  and 
the  American  Public  Health  Association  agreed,  to  advise  standard 
material,  the  idea  being  not  to  find  all  the  bacteria  that  will  de- 
velop, but  to  have  a  uniform  development  and  make  our  standards 
011  that,  ^N"ow,  we  use)  meat  extracts  alone  as  a  culture  and  no 
fresh  meat,  as  some  of  the  laboratories  formerly  did,  and  after  we 
agreed  on  the  material  and  agreed  upon  the  examining  lens,  our 
results  were  very  close.  That  is,  close  in  reference  to  the  subject 
under  discussion. 

About  twenty-three  years  ago,  Dr.  Biggs,  who  was  the 
medical  officer  at  that  time,  suggested  to  the  Board  of  Health 


688 

and  to  the  Board  of  Estimate  that  the  city  should  have  a 
bacteriological  laboratory.  The  laboratory  was  started  and  I  be- 
came his  assistant  in  that  work.  It  grew  and  we  began  to  take  up 
various  problems.  In  1900  we  thought  on  account  of  certain 
things  that  happened  that  milk  should  be  tested  in  this  laboratory. 
Before  that  milk  had  'been  considered  only  on  its  food  value  and 
not  on  its  wholesomeness.  So  in  connection  with  the  Rockefeller 
Institute,  that  allowed  us  a  considerable  sum  of  money,  and  with 
the  Health  Department,  nurses  and  physicians  and  laboratory 
workers,  we  tested  out  the  effect  of  different  types  of  milk  in  the 
feeding  of  children.  Wei  took  three  groups,  one  group  supplied 
with  ordinary  grocery  milk;  one  with  milk  from  the  Straus  milk 
stations ;  one  with  Briarcliff  Manor  certified  milk,  which  was  fur- 
nished us  by  Mr.  Law  free  as  a  test  of  the  value  of  pure  raw  milk. 
That  experiment  demonstrated  that  the  quality  of  milk  had  a  very 
important  bearing  on  the  mortality  rate  of  infants  under  one  year 
old  in  this  city.  It  also  indicated  that  pasteurized  milk  produced 
nearly  as  good  results  as  the  certified  milk,  and  it  demonstrated 
that  sanitary  control  was  very  important,  as  affecting  the  death 
rate  of  children.  We  began  to  make  laboratory  examinations.  The 
bacteria  count,  which  may  'be  of  little  importance  to  adults  in  the 
use  of  milk,  is  of  vital  importance  when  fed  to  children.  A  great 
number  of  bacteria  indicates  that  the  milk  is  dangerous  to  babies, 
although  the  same  milk  might  be  used  by  adult  persons  without 
serious  results,  unless  it  had  specific  disease  producing  bacteria. 
We  approached  the  milk  dealers  in  two  ways.  First,  we  tried  to 
persuade  a  number  of  them  to  undertake  the  production  of  a  very 
clean  raw  milk  and  through  the  Board  of  Health's  cooperation, 
a  number  agreed  to  do  this.  The  work  was  done  in  the  Health 
Department  laboratory.  The  name  "  certified  milk  "  was  intro- 
duced and  restricted  to  milk  which  was  approved  by  the  authorities, 
first,  the  Health  Department,  second,  by  a  committee  of  physicians 
which  by  law  of  this  State  must  be  a  committee  appointed  by  the 
Medical  .Society. 

Certified  Milk 

The  idea  of  the  Medical  Milk  Commission  was  that  there  should 
be  a  body  of  men  who  had  no  self  interest.  No  member  of  it  can 
receive  any  remuneration  for  the  work.  That  we  would  have 


089 

trained  inspectors  and  the  inspectors  would  report  to  the  Commis- 
sion and  the  Board  of  Health  might  report  to  the  commission.  It 
was  not  to  the  replace  the  Board  of  Health  but  it  was  to  aid  the 
Health  Board's  action.  This  meant  a  group  of  men  that  had  noth- 
ing but  the  public  welfare  in  their  minds.  It  was  not  thought  at 
that  time  that  the  Health  Department  could  grade  milk;  but  the 
milk  commission  could  give  a  much  higher  standard  for  one  or  two 
per  cent  of  the  milk  supply  of  New  York,  so  the  milk  commission 
was  made  to  certify  to  certain  milk  as  being  sanitary. 

New  York  Milk  Committee 

Then  a  body  of  volunteers  organized  the  New  York  Milk  Com- 
mittee to  aid  in  the  work  and  they  exercised  considerable  influence 
upon  the  movement  for  better  milk.  Then  developed  the  dairy 
inspection  methods.  Then  the  milk  dealers  established  laboratories 
of  their  own  and  private  laboratories  were  established  to  aid  the 
milk  dealers.  Typhoid  is  the  lowest  now  it  has  ever  been  in  New 
York  city.  That  is  not  true  all  over  the  United  States.  We  have 
dropped  in  New  York  faster  than  the  average.  The  infant  death- 
rate  is  the  lowest  that  it  has  ever  been,  except  as  it  may  have  been 
affected  by  poliomyelitis  this  year.  Leaving  that  out,  the  death- 
rate  this  year  was  less  than  it  has  been  at  any  time  in  New  York 
city. 

Bovine  Tuberculosis  in  Children 

We  tested  four  years  ago  the  amount  of  bovine  tuberculosis  in 
children  in  this  city  and  we  found  that  about  one-third  of  all 
glandular  swellings  in  children  was  due  to  bovine  tuberculosis. 
There  was  a  considerable  proportion  of  deaths  in  children  under 
two  years  from  tuberculosis  due  to  bovine  infections.  During  this 
last  six  months,  we  have  been  testing  over  again,  and  after  three 
years  of  pretty  complete  pasteurization,  we  find  now  that  there  is 
practically  no  bovine  tuberculosis  in  the  children  that  have  lived 
in  New  York  under  three  years  of  age.  I  suggest  that  by  the  use 
of  pasteurization  we  have  practically  blotted  out  new  bovine  in- 
fection in  children. 


G90 

Infection  of  Bovine  Tuberculosis 

Different  localities  have  different  amounts  of  bovine  tubercu- 
losis, depending  upon  various  things,  as  to  the  question  of  whether 
the  milk  is  raw,  boiled  or  pasteurized ;  the  amount  of  bovine  tuber- 
culosis and  the  degree  to  which  children  are  nourished  by  mothers. 
In  New  York  we  found  that  there  was  practically  no  bovine  in 
persons  over  sixteen  years  of  age;  we  found  that  between  three  and 
sixteen  there  was  a  decreasing  amount  from  the  early  age  to  the 
older  age  in  the  amount  of  local  tuberculosis  of  the  glands  of  the 
neck,  chiefly,  and  of  other  lymphatic  glands  of  the  body.  Below 
that  age,  we  found  considerable  amount  of  fatal  tuberculosis  in 
children  and  five  per  cent  of  the  children  dying  of  tuberculosis 
die  of  bovine  tuberculosis.  It  made  a  considerable  number  of 
cases  in  New  York,  upwards  of  3'00  a  year,  infant  children ;  those 
were  only  the  death  cases.  Then  there  were  probably  two  or  three 
thousand  cases  of  glandular  swelling  due  to  it,  not  fatal ;  so  it  was 
a  problem  sufficiently  important  to  be  seriously  considered  and 
eradicated,  if  possible.  Retesting  it  now,  we  find  a  very  different 
condition.  We  find  now  practically  no  bovine  infection  in  chil- 
dren who  have  lived  three  years  in  New  York.  Our  raw  milk 
supply  is  better  and  pasteurization  reasonably  secures  us  against 
disease  infection. 

Mechanism  of  the  Bacteria  Count 

There  are  two  methods :  One  is  to  make  a  count  of  the  actual 
number  of  bacteria  in  milk.  You  take  one  one-hundredth  of  a 
cubic  centimeter  of  milk  and  smear  it  over  a  defined  area  of  a 
slide;  you  fix  that  milk,  remove  its  fat  and  stain  it  on  the  slide; 
then  examine  it  under  the  microscope  on  the  slide  for  bacteria. 
Count  the  actual  number  of  bacteria  by  counting  a  certain  propor- 
tion of  the  area  and  multiply  the  whole  area  by  the  result.  That 
gives  the  whole  number  of  bacteria  in  the  milk,  but  to  do  that  re- 
quires  more  expert  assistants  than  the  routine  ordinary  way.  It  is 
harder  on  the  eyes,  and  on  the  whole  it  does  not  seem  to  give  any 
better  result  than  the  ordinary  method  of  estimation  of  the  sanitary 
condition.  We  want  to  know  the  live  bacteria,  and  not  the  dead 
bacteria,  in  much  of  our  work,  and  this  method  falls  down  in 


691 

the  pasteurized  milk,  because  it  shows  the  dead  as  well  as  the 
living.  'So  that  nearly  all  laboratories  now  follow  a  routine  method 
of  using  a  jelly  and  don't  use  the  count.  The  direct  microscopic 
examination  is  at  the  place  where  the  herds  are,  so  as  to  get  an 
immediate  idea  of  not  only  the  number,  but  the  types  of  bacteria 
coming  from  the  different  cows  in  the  herd,  or  the  different  com- 
pound of  milk  of  different  herds,  but  the  routine  method  is  as 
follows :  In  the  first  place,  the  samples  are  taken  by  the  inspectors 
in  small  bundles  with  the  caps  marked  with  numbers  so  that  as  far 
as  possible  we  safeguard  against  the  mixing  up  of  one  herd  with 
another  herd.  That  is  done  by  the  operator  at  the  country  station 
or  in  the  creamery,  or  even  here  at  the  wagon  or  at  the  railroad. 
These  samples  must  be  preserved  in  ice,  otherwise,  the  bacteria 
that  were  in  there  at  the  start  would  increase  before  the  laboratory 
got  the  sample,  so  they  are  all  required  to  be  iced  by  being  kept 
in  packs  prepared  for  that  purpose.  The  sample  then  reaches  the 
laboratory  and  is  put  in  an  ice-box  and  covered  with  cracked  ice 
so  as  to  be  sure  to  keep  it  cool  during  the  two  or  three  hours  it  stays 
there  before  being  examined ;  that  is,  the  individual  bottle.  Xow, 
we  will  take  one  and  follow  it  out.  The  bottle  is  taken  from  the 
ice-box  and  shaken  twenty-five  times.  We  have  a  definite  number 
of  shakes  so  as  to  have  everybody  follow  the  same  method.  One 
cubic  centimeter  of  this  sample  from  this  bottle  is  then  placed  in 
another  bottle  containing  100  CO  of  sterile  water.  This  again  is 
shaken  twenty-five  times.  One  cubic  centimeter  of  this  dilution 
is  put  into  a  covered  glass  dish ;  a  second  one  cubic  centimeter  is 
put  in  a  second  covered  glass  dish.  On  to  this  is  poured  ten  cubic 
centimeters  of  a  nutrient  agar  jelly  which  is  about  40  degrees 
centigrade.  It  is  thoroughly  liquid,  but  not  so  hot  as  to  injure  the 
bacteria.  The  mixture  now  of  the  diluted  milk  and  the  melted 
nutrient  agar  is  shaken  back  and  forth  on  a  plate  so  as  to  pretty 
thoroughly  disseminate  the  milk  and  the  bacteria  in  the  milk 
throughout  the  jelly.  This  is  then  allowed  to  harden  and  placed 
in  an  incubator  in  the  room  at  blood  heat  for  forty-eight  hours. 
During  this  time  each  living  germ  or  bunch  of  germs,  because  the 
germs  are  so  small  that  a  bunch  makes  only  a  visible  growth,  which 
we  call  a  colony,  develops.  Then  we  count  the  colonies.  It  is  like 
looking  at  a  tree  a  mile  away.  You  see  the  tree  of  bacteria  or 
bunch. 


692 

Now,  we  take  from  the  first  diluted  bottle  one  cubic  centimeter 
and  add  it  to  another  bottle  of  one  hundred  cubic  centimeters  of 
water  and  do  the  same  thing  with  that  dilution ;  now  the  colonies 
in  the  first  two  plates  show  the  number  of  living  bacteria  or  groups 
of  bacteria  in  one  one-hundredths  of  a  cubic  centimeter  of  the  milk, 
and  in  the  second  two  pl.ates  of  one  ten^thousandths  of  a  cubic 
centimeter  of  the  original  milk  and  we  multiply  then  the  number 
of  colonies  we  get  by  one  hundred  or  by  ten  thousand,  according 
to  the  dilution.  If  we  want  to  be  still  more  accurate,  we  make 
dilutions  in  between  those  to  one  one-hundredth,  one  one-thou- 
sandth, one  to  ten-thousandth,  one  to  one  one-hundred  thousandth ; 
but,  as  a  rule,  in  the  Health  Department  work  we  utilize  only  two 
dilutions.  That  is  sufficient  for  grading,  purposes.  The  aim  of 
that  process  is  to  spread  a  large  proportional  sample  in  a  large 
field  so  they  can  be  readily  observed.  If  you  use  more  milk  and 
the  milk  was  seeded  highly  with  bacteria,  there  would  be  such  a 
crowd  that  you  could  not  count,  so  we  take  a  very  small  part  and 
spread  that  over  a  large  field.  Of  course,  there  will  be  dis- 
crepancies in  the  count,  but  it  will  be  fairly  accurate,  in  reference 
to  such  work. 

Of  course,  nobody  at  any  time  or  place  undertakes  to  enumerate 
a  million  or  half  million  of  bacteria  in  a  sample,  but  we  thus  take 
a  small  proportionate  sample  and  spread  that  out  and  count  the 
bacteria  in  that  and  multiply  that  by  the  cubic  centimeter  and  wo 
have  the  approximate  number  that  the  original  sample  contained. 
We  spread  it  out  so  that  if  we  found  four  bacteria  on  one  plate 
and  five  on  'another,  we  would  have  4:  %  bacteria  count  on  the 
plates,  and  we  would  multiply  that  by  the  part.  If  the  sample 
was  one  and  one-ten  thousandth,  that  could  would  show  40,000  to 
50,000.  This  method  is  a  fair  index  of  the  cleanliness  of  produc- 
tion or  care  that  milk  has  had." 

SO-OALLED  "  B  "  AND  "  C  "  MILK  MINGLED  IN  THE  SHIPPING 

STATION 

Certain  distributors  in  their  contracts  provide  for  the  payment 
of  ten.  cents  per  hundred  for  so-called  "  B  "  milk  or  milk  from 
dairies  having  a  total  barn  score  of  68  points  on  the  official  score 
card  more  than  is  paid  for  milk  from  those  dairies  where  the  bam 


693 

score  is  not  68  on  the  official  score  card.  This  results  in  a  certain 
per  cent  of  the  dairymen  in  some  stations  securing  ten  cents  less 
per  hundred  for  their  milk  than  their  neighbors  with  a  higher  score. 
From  time  to  time,  a  new  barn  scoring  either  by  the  station  man- 
ager or  the  agent  of  the  Department  of  Health,  results  in  the  score 
card  being  reduced  and  thus  giving  the  dairyman  less  than  25 
points  on  equipment  and  43  points  on  methods.  This  results  in 
the  dairyman  losing  the  ten  cents  a  hundred  "  premium/7  as  it  is 
designated,  or  "  penalty  "  as  it  appears  to  the  dairyman. 

It  is  not  uncommon  to  find  stations  where  from  one-third  to 
one-half  of  the  dairymen  would  have  a  score  below  68  and  thus 
lose  this  ten  cents  per  hundred  pounds  on  the  price  of  their  milk. 
j^Tot  all  the  stations  engaged  in  collecting  and  shipping  to  New 
York  milk  eligible  for  "  Grade  -(pasteurized)  "  pay  any  addi- 
tional price  for  the  higher  bam  score.  It  is  only  in  the  sections 
where  operators  add  the  additional  ten  cents  for  one  reason  or 
another  that  the  question  arises. 

At  many  of  those  stations,  however  the  dairyman  observes  that 
the  so-called  "  B  "  milk  from  dairies  scoring  68  is  mingled  with 
the  so-called  "  C  "  milk  from  dairies  with  a  less  score  than  68, 
and  the  mingled  milk  with  no  distinctive  marks  shipped  to  the  city. 

Because  of  this  practice,  the  belief  has  arisen  in  many  com- 
munities that  the  payment  of  ten  cents  per  hundred  less  for  milk 
from  dairies  not  scoring  68  was  merely  an  instrumentality  adopted 
by  the  station  to  procure  a  portion  of  the  milk  supplied  at  a  lower 
cost.  Without  understanding  the  purpose  of  the  additional  ten 
cents  per  hundredweight,  and  the  methods  of  the  distributors  pay- 
ing the  so-called  premium,  such  would  undoubtedly  appear  to  be 
the  case. 

The  Sanitary  Code  of  the  City  of  New  York  governing  the 
production,  transportation,  pasteurization  and  sale  of  milk,  etc., 
provides,  among  other  things: 

Grade  A.  Milk  or  Cream,  Pasteurized 

Regulation  120.  Bacterial  content. —  Milk  of  this  designation  shall  not  con- 
tain more  than  30,000  bacteria  per  CC  —  when  delivered  to  the  consumer. 

Regulation  121.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  All  dairies  producing  milk  or  cream 
of  this  designation  shall  score  at  least  25  points  on  equipment  and  43 
points  on  methods,  or  a  total  score  of  08  points  on  an  official  score  card 
approved  by  the  Department  of  Health. 


094 

Regulation  122.  Times  of  delivery. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation 
shall  be  delivered  within  thirty-six  hours  after  pasteurization. 

Regulation  123.  Bottling. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation  shall  be 
delivered  to  the  consumer  only  in  bottles,  unless  otherwise  specified. 

If  emulations  Governing  the  Kale  of  Grade  B  Milk  or  Cream,,  Pasteurized 

Regulation  120.  Bacterial  content. —  No  milk  under  this  designation  shall 
contain  more  than  100,000  bacteria  per  CC  —  when  delivered  to  the  consumer. 
No  milk  supplied  averaging  more  than  300,000  bacteria  per  CC  shall  be 
pasteurized  outside  the  city  of  New  York  to  be  Bold  in  said  city  under  this 
designation. 

Regulation  130.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  Dairies  producing  milk  or  cream  of 
this  designation  shall  score  at  least  20  points  on  equipment  and  35  points 
on  methods,  or  a  total  score  of  55  points,  on  an  otlicial  score  card  approved 
by  the  Department  of  Health. 

Regulation  131.  Time  of  delivery. —  Milk  of  this  designation  shall  be 
delivered  within  thirty-six  hours  after  pasteurization. 

Regulation   132.     Bottling. —  Milk  of  this  designation  may  be  delivered  in 
cans  or  bottles. 
Regulations  Governing  Creameries,  Receiving  Stations  and  Pasteurizing  Plants 

Section  35.  Milk  or  cream  not  to  be  pasteurized  a  second  time. —  No  milk 
or  cream  shall  be  pasteurized  a  second  time. 

Section  30.  Pasteurized  milk  to  be  bottled  at  places  of  pasteuri/at  ion.  - 
Pasteurized  milk  shall  not  be  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale  or  sold  in  hoi  tics 
unless  such  milk  has  been  bottled  at  the  place  of  pasteurization. 

Section  37.  Room  and  apparatus  used  for  the  pasteuri/ution  of  Grade  A 
milk. —  Milk  or  cream  shall  not  be  received  in  any  room  or  apparatus  where 
Grade  A  pasteurized  milk  or  cream  is  handled  or  treated  unless  the  said 
milk  or  cream  complies  with  the  regulations  for  Grade  A  pasteurized  milk. 

The  enforcement  of  these  regulations,  therefore,  would  establish 
that  when  milk  from  the  dairy  scoring  from  55  to  68  on  the  official 
score  card  (the  so-called  "  O  "  milk)  is  delivered  to  the  station 
where  it  is  mingled  with  milk  from  dairies  scoring  68  and  upward, 
all  the  milk  at  such  station  is  at  once  reduced  so  as  to  be  eligible 
only  for  the  Grade  B  pasteurized  product.  In  other  words,  it  would 
appear  that  the  premium  milk  is  at  once  reduced  by  the  mingling 
to  have  the  same  sale  value  or  grade  value  as  the  milk  for  which 
no  premium  is  paid,  instead  of  the  lower  price  milk  being  raised 
to  the  higher  grade  by  the  mingling  process.  In  such  collecting 
stations,  the  milk  from  dairies  scoring  68  and  upward  is  only 
eligible  for  the  same  grade  of  pasteurized  milk  as  that  from  dairies 
scoring  55  and  upwards. 

An  examination  of  the  audits  of  the  larger  companies  contained 
in  this  report  will  disclose  that  only  a  comparatively  small  part 
of  the  milk  from  dairies  scoring  68  and  upward,  which  is  purhased 


G95 

by  those  companies  at  10  cents  per  cwt.  additional,  could  be  or  is 
disposed  of  as  Grade  "A"  (pasteurized.)  The  demand  for  that 
product  is  relatively  small.  The  great  bulk  of  the  product  goes 
into  Grade  B  pasteurized,  the  same  grade  as  so  called  "  C  "  milk 
from  dairies  scoring  below  68  and  a'bove  55. 

If  only  those  dairies  which  actually  produce  milk  used  for 
Grade  "A"  (pasteurized)  received  the  ten  cents  per  hundred 
pounds  additional  in  price,  by  far  the  majority  of  the  dairymen 
now  receiving  the  so-called  barn  score  premium  would  be  cut  off 
from  any  benefit  from  the  high  barn  score  obtained.  The  market  for 
Grade  "A"  (pasteurized)  would  take  but  a  small  part  of  the  milk 
produced  by  dairymen  obtaining  the  higher  barn  score.  It  there- 
fore appears  that,  in  regard  to  these  stations  where  so-called  "  B  " 
and  "  C  "  milk  are  mingled  and  shipped  in  cans  to  New  York  city, 
the  distributor  sells  such  milk  for  no  higher  price  than  that  re- 
ceived for  milk  from  shipping  stations  where  only  "  O  "  milk 
(that  is,  with  a  barn  score  between  55  and  68)  is  gathered. 

The  question  naturally  arises  as  to  why  then  certain  distributors 
should  pay  an  additional  ten  cents  per  hundred  from  barns  scoring 
68  and  upwards,  while  others  ignore  this  altogether.  That  question 
is  answered  by  those  distributors  to  this  effect ;  that  the  payment  of 
the  higher  price  induces  the  dairyman  to  improve  his  methods  and 
equipment  and  thereby  secure  a  better  quality  of  milk  and  enables 
them  to  furnish  a  better  product  to  his  customers ;  that  a  general 
improvement  in  the  condition  of  the  dairies  supplying  the  stations 
is  to  the  advantage  of  their  business  and  that  they  can  afford  to 
pay  and  are  willing  to  pay  an  additional  price  for  such  improve- 
ment; that  they  aim  to  have  their  Grade  "  B  "  (pasteurized  milk) 
as  sanitary  in  every  way  as  the  Grade  aA"  (pasteurized),  in  order 
to  meet  the  increasing  sanitary  requirements  of  the  Health  Depart- 
ment. It  may  be  observed  also  that  the  payment  of  a  Grade  "A" 
(pasteurized)  price  at  collecting  stations  where  only  milk  eligible 
for  Grade  "  B  "  (pasteurized)  is  assembled,  is  really  the  payment 
of  an  advanced  price  for  a  part  of  the  same  sales  product  and  thus 
undoubtedly  secures  to  certain  distributors  a  larger  supply  of  milk 
than  they  would  otherwise  have.  That  result  is  a  direct  benefit 
to  the  dairymen.  However,  the  distributor  who  does  not  assume 
to  handle  anything  but  Grade  "  B  "  (pasteurized)  product  or  even 


090 

Grade  k>  (1  •'  milk  (eligible  for  cooking  and.  manufacturing  pur- 
poses only),  frequently  in  adjusting  his  price  uses  these  features 
of  the  business  to  buy  milk  at  much  lower  prices  than  is  paid  by 
other  distributors,  by  pointing  out  to  the  dairymen  within  the 
range  of  his  collecting  station,  that  they  can  afford  to  deliver  him 
milk  -at  a  considerably  lower  price  because  he  does  not  require  a 
high  barn  score. 

This  lengthy  statement  is  made  for  the  purpose  of  affording 
a  clear  understanding  of  a  matter  which  seems  to  be  troublesome 
in  certain  sections  from  the  obvious  mingling  of  the  high  and  low 
grade  milk  at  certain  stations.  It  seems  to  be  apparent  that  the 
abandonment  of  the  practice  of  paying  a  premium  for  the  high 
barn  score  would  not  be  advantageous  to  the  dairyman  with  the 
low  score,  but  would  only  be  detrimental  and  discouraging  to  the 
dairyman  with  the  high  score. 

SANITARY  CODE  AND  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  PRODUCTION, 
TRANSPORTATION,  PASTEURIZATION  AND  SALE  OF  MILK, 
CREAM,  OR  CONCENTRATED  MILK,  CONDENSED  SKIM  MILK 
AND  MODIFIED  MILK 

DEPARTMENT  OF  HEALTH  ' 
139  Centre  Street,  New  York  City 

Section  155.  Milk,  cream,  condensed,  or  concentrated  milk,  condensed 
skimmed  milk,  and  modified  milk;  sale  regulated;  term  "modified  milk"  de- 
fined; exception. — No  milk  or  cream,  condensed  or  concentrated  milk,  con- 
densed skimmed  milk,  or  modified  milk,  shall  be  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale, 
sold  or  delivered  in  the  city  of  New  York  without  a  permit  issued  therefore 
by  the  Board  of  Health  or  otherwise  than  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of 
said  permit  and  with  the  Regulations  of  said  Board. 

By  the  term  "  modified  milk "  is  meant  milk  of  any  subdivision  of  the 
classification  known  as  "Grade  A;  for  Infants  and  Children,"  which  has 
been  changed  by  the  addition  of  water,  sugar  of  milk,  or  other  substance 
intended  to  render  the  milk  suitable  for  infant  feeding. 

The  provisions  of  this  section  shall  not  apply  to  milk  or  cream  sold  in 
hotels,  restaurants,  and  retail  stores,  nor  to  condensed  milk  or  condensed 
skimmed  milk  when  contained  in  hermetically  sealed  cans.  (As  amended  by 
the  Board  of  Health  Dec.  21,  1915.) 

Sec.  156.  Milk  and  cream;  grades  and  designations. —  All  milk  or  cream 
held,  kept,  offered  for  sale,  sold  or  delivered  in  the  city  of  New  York  shall 
be  so  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale,  sold  or  delivered  in  accordance  with  the 


697 

Regulations  of  the  Board  of  Health  and  under  any  of  the  following  grades  or 
designations  and  not  otherwise: 

"Grade  A:     For  infants  and  children." 

1.  Milk  or  cream   (raw). 

2.  Milk  or  cream  (pasteurized). 

"Grade  B:     For  Adults/' 

1.     Milk  or  cream  (pasteurized). 
"Grade    C:     For  cooking  and  Manufacturing  Purposes  Only." 

1.  Milk   or   cream   not    conforming   to    llic    requirements   of   any 
of   the   subdivisions   of  Grade  A   or   Grade  B,   and  which  has 
has    been    pasteurized    according    to    the    Regulations    of    the 
Board  of  Health  or  boiled  for  at  least  two  (2)  minutes. 

2.  Condensed  skimmed  milk. 

The  provisions  of  this  section  shall  apply  to  milk  or  cream  used  for  the 
purpose  of  producing  or  used  in  preparation  of  sour  milk,  buttermilk,  homo- 
genized milk,  milk  curds,  sour  cream,  Smeteny,  Kumyss,  Matzoon,  Zoolak, 
and  other  similar  products  or  preparations  so  provided  that  any  such  product 
or  preparation  be  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale,  sold  or  delivered  in  the  city  of 
New  York. 

Regulations  of  the  Department  of  Health  of  the  city  of  New  York,  adopted 
March  30,  1915,  effective  April  1,  1915,  relating  to  sections  155  and  156  of  the 
Sanitary  Code. 

Regulation  1.  Milk,  cream,  and  condensed  milk  not  to  be  stored  in  stables 
or  other  insanitary  places. —  Milk,  cream,  or  condensed  milk  shall  not  be 
handled,  stored,  offered  for  sale,  or  sold  in  any  stable;  room  used  for  sleeping 
purposes;  or  in  any  room  or  place  which  is  dark,  damp,  poorly  ventilated,  or 
insanitary. 

Regulation  2.  Water-closet  compartments. — Every  water-closet  compart- 
ment, except  when  provided  with  mechanical  means  of  ventilation,  shall  have 
a  window  at  least  one  foot  by  three  feet  between  stop-beads  opening  to  the 
external  air  and  the  entire  window  shall  be  made  so  as  to  readily  open,  or  an 
opening  connected  with  the  external  air  measuring  at  least  144  square  inches 
for  each  water-closet  or  urinal,  with  an  increase  of  72  square  inches  for  each 
additional  water-closet  or  urinal.  The  door  or  doors  of  the  water-closet  com- 
partment shall  be  self-closing.  Where  the  water-closet  is  in  direct  communi- 
cation with  the  room  in  which  food  is  prepared  or  stored,  if  required  by  the 
Department  of  Health,  a  suitable  and  properly  lighted  vestibule  shall  be 
provided.  The  door  of  the  vestibule  shall  be  self-closing.  All  water-closet 
fixtures,  water-closet  compartments,  and  vestibules  shall  be  maintained  in  a 
clean  and  sanitary  condition  and  in  good  repair. 

Regulation  3.  Rooms,  insanitary  condition. — Milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream 
shall  riot  be  sold  or  stored  in  any  room  which  is  dark,  poorly  ventilated,  or 
dirty,  or  in  which  rubbish  or  useless  material  is  allowed  to  accumulate,  or 
in  which  there  are  offensive  odors. 

Regulation  4.  Milk  vessels  to  be  protected. — All  vessels  which  contain 
milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream,  must  be  protected  by  suitable  covers.  Ves- 


698 

sels  must  be  so  placed  that  milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream  will  not  become 
contaminated  by  dust,  dirt,  or  flies. 

Regulation  5.  Milk  not  to  be  kept  on  sidewalk. —  Milk,  condensed  milk,  or 
cream  shall  not  be  allowed  to  stand  on  the  sidewalk  or  outside  of  the  store, 
longer  than  is  absolutely  necessary  for  transportation. 

Regulation  6.  Milk  not  to  be  transferred  on  street. —  Milk,  condensed  milk, 
or  cream  must  not  be  transferred  from  one  container  to  another  on  the 
streets,  at  ferries  or  «t  railroad  depots, 

Regulation  7.  Ice  tub  or  ice-box  to  be  provided. —  Vessels  in  which  milk, 
condensed  milk,  or  cream  is  kept  for  sale  shall  be  kept  either  in  a  milk 
tub,  properly  iced,  or  in  a  clean  ice-box  or  refrigerator  in  which  these  or 
similar  articles  of  food  are  stored. 

Regulation  8.  Containers  to  be  cleaned  and  sterilized. —  All  containers  in 
which  milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream  is  stored,  handled,  transported,  or 
sold,  must  be  thoroughly  cleaned  and  sterilized  before  filling.  Such  cleaning 
and  sterilizing  shall  not  be  done,  nor  shall  any  containers  be  filled  in  any 
stable,  in  any  room  used  for  sleeping  purposes,  or  in  any  room  having  a 
direct  connection  with  such  stables  or  rooms,  or  with  water-closet  compart- 
ments, unless  such  water-closet  compartments  conform  to  Regulation  2  of 
these  regulations. 

Regulation  9.  Ice-box  or  ice-tub  to  be  kept  clean. — The  ice-box  or  ice-tub 
in  which  milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream  is  kept  must  be  maintained  in  a 
thoroughly  clean  condition. 

Regulation  10.  Drainage  of  ice-box. —  The  over-flow  pipe  from  the  ice-box 
in  which  milk,  condensed  milk,  or  cream  is  kept  must  not  be  directly  con- 
nected with  the  drain  pipe  or  sewer,  but  must  discharge  into  a  properly 
trapped,  sewer-connected,  water-supplied  open  sink. 

Regulation  11.  Health  of  employees. —  No  person  having  an  infectious 
disease,  or  caring  for  or  coming  in  contact  with  any  person  having  an  infec- 
tious disease,  shall  handle  milk. 

Regulation  12.  Worn  or  badly  rusted  receptacles. — All  cans  or  receptacles 
used  in  the  sale  or  delivery  of  milk,  cream,  or  condensed  milk  when  found 
to  be  in  an  unfit  condition  to  be  so  used  by  reason  of  being  worn  out,  badly 
rusted,  or  with  rusted  inside  surface,  or  in  such  condition  that  they  cannot  be 
rendered  clean  and  sanitary  by  washing  shall  be  condemned  by  inspectors 
of  this  Department.  Every  such  can  or  receptacle  when  so  condemned  shall 
be  marked  by  a  stamp,  impression,  or  device  showing  that  it  had  been  so 
condemned  and  when  so  condemned  shall  not  thereafter  be  used  by  any 
person,  for  the  purpose  of  selling,  delivering,  or  shipping  milk,  cream,  or 
condensed  milk. 


609 

ADDITIONAL     REGULATIONS    GOVERNING     THE    PRODUCTION     AND 
SALE  OF  MILK  WITHIN  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK. 

Regulation  16.  Milk  produced  in  violation  of  the  regulations. —  Milk  pro- 
duced in  violation  of  these  regulations  shall  be  dee:uod  adulterated  as  defined 
in  section  156  of  the  Sanitary  Code. 

Regulation  17.  Water  used  for  washing  and  cleaning  containers. —  All  water 
used  for  washing  and  cleaning  containers,  utensils,  or  apparatus  used  in 
preparing  milk  for  sale  in  the  city  of  New  York  shall  be  clean  and  whole- 
some. The  water  shall  be,  whenever  possible,  from  a  public  supply  of  known' 
purity.  Xo  water,  other  than  from  a  public  supply,  shall  be  used  within 
the  city  of  New  York  without  a  permit  therefor  issued  by  the  Board  of 
Health. 

Regulation  18.  Milk  house. —  A  properly  constructed,  conveniently  located 
milk  house  shall  be  provided.  The  milk  house  shall  have  no  direct  com- 
munication with  stable. 

Regulation  18.  Floors  of  milk  house. —  The  floors  of  milk  house,  shall  be 
constructed  of  cement  and  so  graded  as  to  discharge  all  surface  drainage 
from  one  or  more  points  into  properly  trapped  sewer-connected  drains.  Where 
no  sewer  is  provided  the  drains  must  discharge  into  properly  constructed  cess- 
pools. The  floor  opening  of  each  drain  shall  be  covered  by  a  suitable  iron 
strainer. 

Regulation  20.  Walls  and  ceilings. —  Walls  and  ceilings  of  the  milk  house 
must  be  sheathed  and  finished  smooth  to  prevent  the  accumulation  of  dust 
and  dirt. 

Regulation  21.  Maintenance  of  milk  house. —  The  interior  of  the  milk 
house,  unless  constructed  of  cement  or  similar  material,  must  be  painted 
with  some  light  colored  waterproof  paint.  The  milk  house  must  be  main- 
tained at  all  times  in  a  cleanly  condition,  free  from  dust,  dirt,  rubbish,  and 
cobwebs.  No  material  foreign  to  the  proper  care  and  handling  of  milk  shall 
be  kept  or  allowed  to  remain  in  the  milk  house. 

Regulation  22.  Separate  rooms  shall  be  provided  for  the  handling  and 
storage  of  milk. —  Separate  rooms  must  be  provided  for  the  handling  and 
storing  of  milk  and  the  washing  of  utensils.  Bottle  caps  and  tags  must  not 
be  stored  in  the  milk  handling  room.  A  sufficient  number  for  immediate 
use  should  be  taken  to  the  bottling  room  immediately  preceding  the  process 
of  bottling. 

Regulation  23.  Supply  of  hot  and  cold  water  to  be  provided. —  A  conveni- 
ent and  adequate  supply  of  hot  and  cold  water  must  be  provided  for  wash- 
ing utensils  and  cooling  milk. 

Regulation  24.  Cleaning  of  pails,  strainers,  bottles,  cans,  etc. —  All  pails, 
strainers,  bottles,  cans,  and  apparatus  used  in  handling  or  bottling  milk 
must  be  washed,  immediately  after  using,  in  hot  water  and  some  proper 
alkaline  washing  solution,  rinsed  with  clean  boiling  water,  and  stored  in. 
such  a  manner  as  to  remain  clean  until  used. 


Regulation  25.  Tubs  for  washing  purposes  to  be  provided. —  The  wash 
room  must  have  tubs  for  washing  purposes  which  shall  be  constructed  of 
some  non-absorbent  material.  All  draining  shelves  and  racks  shall  also  be 
of  non-absorbent  material. 

Regulation  26.  Lighting  of  milk  house  and  screen  doors  to  be  provided. — 
Each  room  of  the  milk  house  shall  be  provided  with  sufficient  window  light, 
and  all  doors  and  windows  shall  be  screened  to  prevent  the  access  of  flies, 
between  the  1st  day  of  May  and  the  1st  day  of  November  of  each  year.  The 
premises  shall  be  kept  free  from  vermin  at  all  times.  All  doors  shall  be  self- 
closing. 

Regulation  27.  Cooling  and  storage  facilities  to  be  provided.—  The  milk 
room  shall  contain  cooling  and  storage  facilities  of  sufficient  capacity  to  cool 
and  store  all  milk  produced  on  the  premises  during  twenty-four  hours  to  a 
temperature  of  50°  F.  or  below.  If  a  pool  is  used  for  such  purpose  it  shall 
be  properly  drained  and  trapped.  All  pools  used  in  the  cooling  or  storage  of 
milk  shall  be  emptied  and  cleaned  at  least  once  in  twenty-four  hours. 

Regulation  28.  Connection  between  milk  room  and  other  rooms. —  Where- 
ever  there  is  direct  connection  between  the  milk  room  and  any  other  room, 
a  self-closing  door  must  be  provided. 

Regulation  29.  Milk  pails. —  No  pail  should  be  used  during  the  process  of 
milking  which  has  a  top  opening  of  a  diameter  greater  than  8  inches.  The 
inner  surface  of  all  milk  pails  and  utensils  shall  be  smooth  and  heavily  tinned; 
all  seams  must  be  soldered  flush. 

Regulation  30.  Size  of  milk  house. —  The  milk  house  and  each  room  thereof 
must  be  of  sufficient  size  to  allow  plenty  of  room,  and  no  part  of  the  milk 
house  shall  be  maintained  in  an  overcrowded  condition. 

Regulation  31.  Milk  to  be  protected. —  The  milk  shall  at  no  time  be  ex- 
posed to  dust  and  dirt. 

Regulation  32.    Milk  handling  to  be  conducted  in  a  cleanly  manner. —  All 

milk  and  milk  handling  must  be  conducted  in  a  cleanly  manner. 

Regulation  33.  Health  of  employees. — No  person  having  or  coming  in 
contact  directly  or  indirectly  with  any  infectious  or  venereal  disease  shall 
be  allowed  to  milk,  or  handle  milk  or  milk  utensils. 

Regulation  34.  Clothing  of  milkers. —  The  outer  clothing  of  milkers  and 
milk  handlers  must  consist  of  clean  overalls  and  jackets  of  some  light 
colored  material. 

Regulation  35.  Cows  to  be  groomed  daily. —  Cows  must  be  groomed  daily 
and  be  kept  at  all  times  clean  and  free  from  accumulation  of  manure,  mud, 
or  other  filth. 

Regulation  36.  Cows  to  be  clipped. —  The  long  hairs  upon  the  flanks, 
udders,  and  tails  must  be  clipped  and  kept  short. 

Regulation  37.  Cleaning  of  cows  prior  to  milking. —  The  udders  and  teats 
must  be  washed  clean  immediately  prior  to  milking  and  dried  with  a  clean 
cloth. 


701 

Regulation  38.  Throat  latch  to  be  used. —  To  prevent  the  cows  from 
lying  down  between  cleaning  and  milking,  a  throat  latch  shall  be  provided 
and  used. 

Regulation  39  Cleanliness  of  milkers. —  The  hands  of  milkers  and  milk 
handlers  must  be  washed  clean  Avith  soap  and  water  immediately  prior  to, 
and  kept  clean  during  the  milking  and  handling  of  milk.  Convenient  facili- 
ties, consisting  of  water,  soap,  basin,  and  clean  towels,  shall  be  provided  for 
such  purpose. 

Regulation  40.  Dry  milking. — The  hands  and  teats  must  be  kept  dry 
during  milking.  The  first  stream  from  each  teat  shall  be  rejected. 

Regulation  41.  Health  of  Cows. —  The  cows  must  be  healthy  and  free  from 
disease  as  determined  by  a  physical  examination.  Such  examination  mifst 
be  made  at  least  once  eacli  year  by  a  qualified  veterinarian  and  a  certificate 
certifying  thereto  filed  with  the  Department  of  Health,  and  no  cows  shall  be 
admitted  to  the  herd  until  after  such  physical  examination. 

Regulation  42.  Feeding  of  Cows. —  Only  feed,  which  is  of  good  quality, 
mid  only  grain  and  coarse  fodder  which  are  free  from  dirt  and  mould  shall 
be  used.  Distillery  waste  or  any  substance  in  an  advanced  or  injurious  state 
of  putrefaction  must  not  be  fed  to  cows. 

Regulation  43.  Hay  not  to  be  fed  during  milking. —  No  hay  or  other  dry 
fodder  shall  be  fed  to  cows  during  milking  or  immediately  prior  thereto. 

Regulation  44.  Bedding  of  cows. —  The  cows  shall  be  bedded  with  some 
clean  material,  preferably  straw,  sawdust,  or  shavings,  and  the  bedding 
shall  be  renewed  each  day. 

Regulation  45.  Milk  from  diseased  cows. —  Milk  from  diseased  cows,  and 
milk  which  has  been  polluted  with  fecal  matter,  must  be  immediately  de- 
stroyed. 

Regulation  46.  Milking  stools  to  be  used. —  Milking  stools  shall  be  con- 
structed of  metal  having  a  smooth  surface  and  must  be  kept  clean  at  all 
times. 

Regulation  47.  Milk  to  be  immediately  cooled. —  All  milk  as  soon  as 
drawn  must  be  immediately  removed  to  the  milk'  house  and  strained.  All 
milk  must  be  cooled  to  at  least  50  degrees  F.  within  two  hours  of  its  pro- 
duction and  maintained  at  or  below  such  temperature  until  delivered  to  the 
consumer. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  PRODUCTION  OF  MILK 
OUTSIDE  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK,  AND  SHIPPED  FOR  SALE 
TO  THE  CITY  OF  NEW  YORK. 

Regulation  50.  Cows  to  be  kept  clean. —  The  cows  shall  be  kept  clean, 
and  manure  must  not  be  permitted  to  collect  upon  the  tail,  sides,  udder  and 
belly. 

Regulation  51.  Cows  to  be  groomed  daily. —  The  cows  shall  be  groomed 
daily,  and  all  collections  of  manure,  mud  or  other  filth  must  not  be  allowed 
to  remain  upon  their  flanks,  udders  or  bellies  during  milking. 


702 

Regulation  52.  Clipping  of  long  hairs  from  udder  and  flanks  required. — 
The  clipping  of  long  hairs  from  the  udder  and  flanks  of  the  cows  is  of 
assistance  in  preventing  the  collection  of  filth  which  may  drop  into  the  milk. 
The  hair  on  the  tails  shall  be  cut,  so  that  the  brush  will  be  well  above  the 
ground. 

Regulation  53.  Udder  and  teats  to  be  cleaned  before  milking. —  The  udders 
and  teats  of  the  cow  shall  be  thoroughly  cleaned  before  milking;  this  to  be 
done  by  thorough  brushing  and  the  use  of  a  cloth  and  warm  water. 

Regulation  54.  Throat  latch  to  be  provided. —  To  prevent  the  cows  from 
lying  down  and  getting  dirty  between  cleaning  and  milking,  a  throat  latch 
of  rope  or  chain  shall  be  fastened  across  the  stanchions  under  the  cow's  neck. 

Regulation  55.  Only  feed  of  good  quality  to  be  used. —  Only  feed  which  is 
of  good  quality,  and  only  grain  and  coarse  fodders  which  are  free  from  dirt 
and  mould  shall  be  used.  Distillery  waste  or  any  substance  in  the  state  of 
fermentation  or  putrefaction  must  not  be  fed  to  cows. 

Regulation  56.  Cows  not  in  good  flesh  and  condition  to  be  removed  from 
herd. —  Cows  which  are  not  in  good  flesh  and  condition  shall  be  immediately 
removed  and  their  milk  kept  separate  until  their  health  has  been  passed 
upon  by  a  veterinarian. 

Regulation  57.  Examination  by  veterinarian  to  be  made  annually. — An 
examination  by  a  licensed  veterinary  surgeon  shall  be  made  at  least  once  a 
year. 

Regulation  58.  No  stagnant  water,  hogpen,  privy,  etc.,  to  be  located 
within  100  feet  of  cow  stable. —  No  stagnant  water,  hogpen,  privy,  or  un- 
covered cesspool  or  manure  pit  shall  be  maintained  within  100  feet  of  the 
cow  stable. 

Regulation  59.  Adequate  ventilation  to  be  provided. —  The  cow  stable  shall 
be  provided  with  some  adequate  means  of  ventilation,  either  by  the  construc- 
tion of  sufficient  air  chutes  extending  from  the  room  in  which  the  cows  are 
kept  to  the  outside  air,  or  by  the  installation  of  muslin  stretched  over  the 
window  openings. 

Regulation  60.  Window  light. — Windows  shall  be  installed  in  the  cow 
barn  to  provide  sufficient  light  (2  sq.  ft.  of  window  light  to  each  600  cu.  ft. 
of  air  space  the  minimum)  and  the  panes  be  washed  and  kept  clean. 

Regulation  61.  Air  space  for  each  cow. —  There  shall  be  at  least  600 
cubic  feet  of  air  space  for  each  cow. 

Regulation  62.  Milch  cows  to  be  kept  in  place  used  for  no  other  purpose. 
— Milch  cows  shall  be  kept  in  a  place  which  is  used  for  no  other  purpose. 

Regulation  63.  Construction  of  floors. —  Stable  floors  shall  be  made  water- 
tight, be  properly  graded  and  well  drained,  and  be  of  some  non-absorbent 
material. 

Regulation  64.  Feeding  troughs  and  platforms  to  be  lighted  and  kept  clean. 
— The  feeding  troughs  and  platforms  shall  be  well  lighted  and  kept  clean 
at  all  times. 


703 

Regulations  65.  Ceiling  to  be  kept  free  from  dirt,  cobwebs  and  straw. — 
The  ceiling  shall  be  thoroughly  swept  down  and  kept  free  from  hanging 
straw,  dirt  and  cobwebs. 

Regulation  66.  Construction  of  ceilings. —  The  ceiling  must  be  so  con- 
structed that  dust  and  dirt  therefrom  shall  not  readily  fall  to  the  floor  or 
into  the  milk.  ]f  the  space  over  the  cows  is  used  for  storage  of  hay,  the 
ceiling  shall  be  made  tight  to  prevent  chaff  and  dust  from  falling  through. 

Regulation  67.  Walls  and  ledge  to  be  kept  free  from  dirt,  manure  and 
cobwebs. —  The  walls  and  ledges  shall  be  thoroughly  swept  down  and  kept 
free  from  dust,  dirt,  manure,  or  cobwebs,  and  the  floors  and  premises  be 
kept  free  from  dirt,  rubbish  and  decayed  animal  or  vegetable  matter  at  all 
times. 

Regulation  68.  Cow  beds  to  be  kept  clean. —  The  cow  beds  shall  be  so 
graded  and  kept  that  they  will  be  clean  and  sanitary  at  all  tiir.es. 

Regulation  69.  Stable  to  be  whitewashed  twice  a  year. —  Stables  shall  be 
whitewashed  at  least  twice  a  year  unless  the  walls  are  painted  or  are  of 
smooth  cement. 

Regulation  70.  Manure  to  be  removed  twice  daily. —  Manure  must  be  re- 
moved from  the  stalls  and  gutters  at  least  twice  daily.  This  must  not  be 
done  during  milking,  nor  within  one  hour  prior  thereto. 

Regulation  71.  Manure  not  to  be  stored  within  200  feet  of  stable.— 
Manure  shall  be  taken  from  the  barn,  preferably  drawn  to  the  field.  When 
the  weather  is  such  that  this  cannot  be  done,  it  should  be  stored  no  nearer 
than  200  feet  from  the  stable  and  the  manure  pile1  should  be  so  located  that 
the  cows  cannot  get  at  it. 

Regulation  72.  Disposal  of  liquid  matter. —  The  liquid  matter  shall  be 
absorbed  and  removed  daily  and  at  no  time  be  allowed  to  overflow  or  satu- 
rate the  ground  under  or  around  the  cow  barn. 

Regulation  73.  Construction  of  manure  gutters. — Manure  gutters  shall  be 
from  six  to  eight  inches  deep,  and  constructed  of  concrete,  stone  or  some 
non-absorbent  material. 

Regulation  74.  Use  of  land  plaster  or  lime  recommended. —  The  use  of 
land  plaster  or  lime  is  recommended  upon  the  floors  and  gutters. 

Regulation  75.  Character  of  bedding  to  be  used. —  Only  bedding  which  is 
clean,  dry  and  absorbent  shall  be  used,  preferably  sawdust,  shavings,  dried 
leaves  or  straw.  No  horse  manure  should  be  used  as  bedding. 

Regulation  76.  Construction  of  flooring. —  The  flooring  where  the  cows 
stand  shall  be  so  constructed  that  all  manure  may  drop  into  the  gutter  and 
not  upon  the  floor  itself. 

Regulation  77.  Floor  not  to  be  swept  prior  to  milking  cows. —  The  floor 
shall  be  swept  daily.  This  must  be  done  one  hour  prior  to  milking  time. 

Regulation  78.  Drinking  basin  for  cows  to  be  kept  clean. —  If  individual 
drinking  basins  are  used  for  the  cows  they  should  be  frequently  drained  and 
cleaned. 


704 

Regulation  79.  Live  stock  other  than  cows  to  be  excluded  from  stable 
where  milch  cows  are  kept. —  All  livestock  other  than  cows  shall  be  excluded 
from  the  room  in  which  milch  cows  are  kept.  (Calf  or  bull  pens  may  be 
allowed  in  the  same  room  if  kept  in  the  same  clean  and  sanitary  manner  as 
the  cow  beds.)  ; 

Regulation  80.  Barnyard  to  be  cleaned. —  The  barnyard  shall  be  well 
drained  and  dry,  and  should  be  as  much  sheltered  as  possible  from  the  wind 
and  cold.  Manure  should  not  be  allowed  to  collect  therein. 

Regulation  81.  Separate  quarters  to'  be  provided  for  sick  cows.— A  suit- 
able place  in  some  separate  building  shall  be  provided  for  the  use  of  the 
cows  when  sick,  and  separate  quarters  must  be  provided  for  cows  when 
calving. 

Regulation  82.  Silo  or  grain  pit  not  to  open  directly  into  stable. —  There 
shall  be  no  direct  opening  from  any  silo  or  grain  pit  into  the  room  in  which 
the  milch  cows  are  kept. 

Regulation  83.  Milk  house  to  be  provided. —  A  milk  house  must  be  pro- 
vided which  is  separated  from  the  stable  and  dwelling.  It  shall  be  located 
on  elevated  ground,  with  no  hogpen,  privy,  or  manure  pile  within  100  feet. 

Regulation  84.  Milk  house  to  be  kept  clean. —  Milk  house  must  be  kept 
clean  and  not  used  for  any  purpose  except  the  handling  of  milk. 

Regulation  85.  Floor  of  milk  house  to  be  properly  graded  and  water- 
tight.—  Milk  house  shall  be  provided  with  sufficiient  light  and  ventilation, 
with  floors  properly  graded  and  made  water-tight. 

Regulation  86.  Milk  house  to  be  lighted  and  ventilated. —  Milk  house 
shall  be  provided  with  adjustable  sashes  to  furnish  sufficient  light  and  some 
proper  method  of  ventilation  shall  be  installed. 

Regulation  87.  Size  of  milk  house. —  The  milk  house  shall  be  provided 
with  an  ample  supply  of  clean  water  for  cooling  the  milk,  and  if  it  is  not  a 
running  supply,  the  water  should  be  changed  twice  daily.  Also  a  supply 
of  clean  ice  should  be  provided  to  be  used  for  cooling  the  milk  to  50  degrees 
within  two  hours  after  milking. 

Regulation  88.  Storing  of  empty  cans. —  Suitable  means  shall  be  provided 
within  the  milk  house,  to  expose  the  milk  pails,  cans  and  utensils  to  the  sun 
or  to  live  steam. 

Regulation  89.     Washing  facilities  for  milkers  to  be  provided. —  Facilities 

consisting  of  wash  basins,  soap  and  towel  shall  be  provided  for  the  use  of 

milkers   before   and  during  milking.  During   the   summer   months   the   milk 

house  should  be  properly  screened  to  exclude  flies. 

Regulation  90  Health  of  employees. —  Any  person  having  any  communi- 
cable or  infectious  disease,  or  one  caring  for  persons  having  such  diseases, 
must  not  be  allowed  to  handle  the  milk  or  milk  utensils. 

Regulation  91.  Milkers  to  clean  hands  before  milking. —  The  hands  of  the 
milkers  must  be  thoroughly  washed  with  soap  and  water,  and  carefully  dried 
on  a  clean  towel  before  milking. 


705 

Regulation  92.  Clothing  to  be  worm  during  milking.— Clean  overalls  and 
jumpers  shall  be  worn  during  the  milking  of  cows.  They  should  be  used 
for  no  other  purposes,  and  when  not  in  use  should  be  kept  in  a  clean  place 
protected  from  dust. 

Regulation  93.  Milking  with  wet  hands  condemned. —  The  hands  and  teats 
shall  be  kept  dry  during  milking.  The  practice  of  moistening  the  hands  with 
milk  is  to  be  condemned. 

Regulation  94.  Milking  sto'ols  to  be  kept  clean. —  The  milking  stools  shall 
be  at  all  times  kept  clean,  and  iron  stools  are  recommended. 

Regulation  95.  Fore  milk  to  be  rejected. —  The  first  streams  from  each 
teat  shall  be  rejected,  as  this  fore  milk  contains  more  bacteria  than  the  rest 
of  the  milk. 

Regulation  96.  Milk  drawn  from  cows  15  days  before  or  5  days  after 
parturition  to  be  rejected. —  All  milk  drawn  from  cows  15  days  before,  or  5 
days  after  parturition  shall  be  rejected. 

Rgulation  97.  Small-mouth  milking  pail  to  be  used. —  The  pails  in  which 
the  milk  is  drawn  should  have  as  small  an  opening  at  the  top  as  can  be 
used  in  milking;  top  opening  preferably  not  to  exceed  8  inches  in  diameter. 
This  lessens  the  contamination  by  dust  and  dirt  during  milking. 

Regulation  98.  Milking  to  be  done  rapidly. —  The  milking  should  be  done 
rapidly  and  quietly  and  the  cows  should  be  treated  kindly. 

Regulation  99.  Feeding  just  prior  to  milking  prohibited. —  Dry  fodder 
should  not  be  fed  to  the  cows  during  or  just  before  milking,  as  dust  there- 
from may  fall  into  the  milk. 

Regulation  100.    Milk  utensils  to  be  kept  clean  and  in  good  repair.  — All 

milk  utensils,  including  pails,  cans,  strainers,  and  dippers,  must  be  kept 
thoroughly  clean  and  must  be  washed  and  scalded  after  each  using,  and  all 
seams  in  these  utensils  should  be  cleaned,  scraped  and  soldered  flush. 

Regulation  101.  Shipment'  of  milk  from  diseased  cows  prohibited. —  Milk 
from  diseased  cows  must  not  be  shipped. 

Regulation  102.  Adulteration  prohibited. —  The  milk  must  not  be  in  any 
way  adulterated. 

Regulation  103.  Milk  to  be  immediately  strained  and  cooled. —  The  milk 
as  soon  as  drawn  shall  be  removed  to  the  milk  house  and  immediately  strained 
and  cooled  to  the  proper  temperature. 

Regulation  104.  Milk  to  be  cooled  below  50  degrees  F.  within  two  hours 
after  milking. —  All  milk  must  be  cooled  to  a  temperature  below  50  degrees 
F.  within  two  hours  after  being  drawn,  and  kept  thereafter  below  that  until 
delivered  to  the  creamery. 

Regulation  105.  Straining  of  milk. —  The  milk  shall  be  strained  into  can« 
which  are  standing  in  ice  water  which  reaches!  the  neck  of  the  can.  The 
more  rapidly  the  milk  is  cooled,  the  safer  it  is,  and  longer  it  will  keep  sweet. 
Ice  should  be  used  in  cooling  milk,  as  very  few  springe  are  cold  enough  for 
the  purpose. 

23 


706 

Regulation  106.  Use  of  aerators. —  If  aerators  are  used,  they  shall  stand 
where  the  air  is  free  from  dust  or  odors,  and  on  no  account  should  they  be 
used  in  a,  stable,  or  out  of  doors. 

Regulation  107.  Cleaning  of  milk  strainers. —  Milk  strainers  shall  be  kept 
clean,  scalded  a  second  time  just  before  using,  and  if  cloth  strainers  arc 
used,  several  of  them  should  be  provided  in  order  that  they  may  be  fre- 
quently changed  during  the  straining  of  the  milk. 

Regulation  108.  Use  of  preservatives  or  coloring  matter  prohibited. —  The 
use  of  any  preservative  or  coloring  matter  is  adulteration,  and  its  use  by 
a  producer  or  shipper  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  exclusion  of  his  product 
from  the  city  of  New  York. 

Regulation  109.  Water. —  The  water  supply  used  in  the  dairy  and  for 
washing  utensils  should  be  absolutely  free  from  any  contamination,  suffici- 
ently abundant  for  all  purposes,  and  easy  of  access. 

Regulation  110.  Protection  of  water  supply. —  The  water  supply  shall  be 
protected  against  flood  or  surface  drainage. 

Regulation  111.  Location  of  privy. —  The  privy  shall  be  located  not  nearer 
than  100  feet  of  the  source  of  the  water  supply,  or  else  be  provided  with  fi 
watertight  box  that  can  be  readily  removed  and  cleaned,  and  so  constructed 
that  at  no  time  will  the  contents  overflow  or  saturate  the  surrounding  ground, 

Regulation  112.  Source  of  water  supply. —  The  source  of  the  water  supply 
shall  be  rendered  safe  against  contamination  by  having  no  stable,  barnyard, 
pile  of  manure  or  other  source  of  contamination  located  within  200  feet  of  it. 

REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  SALE  OF  GRADE  "A"  MILK  OR 

CREAM  (raw). 

Definition. —  Grade  "A"  milk  or  cream  (raw)  is  milk  or  cream  produced 
and  handled  in  accordance  with  the  Regulations  as  herein  set  forth. 

Regulation  113.  Tuberculin  test  and  physical  condition. — Only  such 
animals  shall  be  admitted  to  the  herd  as  are  in  good  physical  condition.  a$ 
shown  by  a  thorough  physical  examination  accompanied  by  a  test  with  the 
diagnostic  injection  of  tuberculin,  within  a  period  of  one  month  previous  to 
such  admission.  The  test  is  to  be  carried  out  as  prescribed  in  the  Regula- 
tions of  the  Department  of  Health  governing  the  tuberculin  testing  of  cattle. 
A  chart  recording  the  result  of  the  official  test  must  be  in  the  possession  of  the 
Department  of  Health  before  the  admission  of  any  animal  to  the  herd. 

Regulation  114.  Bacterial  contents. —  Grade  "A"  milk  (raw)  shall  not 
contain  more  than  60.000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  and  cream  more  than  300,000 
bacteria  per  c.  c.  when  delivered  to  the  consumer  or  at  any  time  prior  to 
such  delivery. 

Regulation  115.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  All  dairies  producing  milk  of  this 
designation  shall  score  at  least  25  points  on  equipment  and  50  points  on 
methods,  or  a  total  score  of  75  points  on  an  official  dairy  score  card  approved 
by  the  Department  of  Health. 

Regulation  116.  Time  of  delivery. —  Milk  of  this  designation  shall  be  de- 
livered to  the  consumer  within  30  hours  after  production. 


707 

Regulation  117.  Bottling. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation  shall  be 
livered  to  the  consumer  only  in  bottles,  unless  otherwise  specified  in  the 
permit. 

Regulation  118.  Labelling. —  The  caps  of  all  bottles  containing  Grade 
"A"  milk  or  cream  (raw)  shall  be  white,  with  the  grade  and  designation 
"Grade  A  (raw)/'  the  name  and  address  of  the  dealer,  and  the  word 
"  Certified,"  when  authorized  by  the  State  law,  clearly,  legibly,  and'  con- 
spicuously displayed  on  the  outer  side  thereof.  No  other  word,  statement, 
design,  mark,  or  device  shall  appear  on  that  part  of  the  outer  cap  containing 
the  grade  and  the  designation  unless  authorized  and  permitted  by  the  De- 
partment of  Health.  A  proof  print  or  sketch  of  such  cap,  showing  the  size 
and  arrangement  of  the  lettering  thereon,  shall  be  submitted  to  and  ap- 
proved by  the  said  Department  before  being  attached  to  any  bottle  contain- 
ing milk  or  cream  of  the  said  grade  and  designation. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  SALE   OF  GRADE  "A" 
MILK  OR  CREAM  (Pasteurized). 

Definition. —  Grade  "A"  milk  or  cream  (Pasteurized)  is  milk  or  cream 
handled  and  sold  by  dealers  holding  permits  therefor  from  the  Board  of 
Health,  and  produced  and  handled  in  accordance  with  the  Regulations  aa 
herein  set  forth. 

Regulation  119.  Physical  examination  of  cows. —  All  cows  producing  milk 
or  cream  of  this  designation  must  be  healthy,  as  determined  by  a  physical 
examination  made  annually  by  a  duly  licensed  veterinarian. 

Regulation  120.  Bacterial  content. —  Milk  of  Ihis  designation  sluill  not 
contain  more  than  30.000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  and  cream  more  than  150,000  bac- 
teria per  c.  c.  when  delivered  to  the  consumer  or  at  any  time  after  pasteuri- 
zation and  prior  to  such  delivery.  Xo  milk  supply  averaging  more  than 
200,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  shall  be  pasteurized  to  be  sold  under  this  designation. 

Regulation  121.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  All  dairies  producing  milk  or  cream 
of  this  designation  shall  score  at  least  25  points  on  equipment  and  43  point? 
on  methods,  or  a  total  score  of  68  points  on  an  official  score  card  approved  bj 
the  Department  of  Health. 

Regulation  122.  Times  of  delivery. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation 
shall  be  delivered  within  3G  hours  after  pasteurization. 

Regulation  123.  Bottling. —  Milk  or  cream  of  thi  sdesignation  shall  be  de- 
livered to  the  consumer  only  in  bottles  unless  otherwise  specified. 

Regulation  124.  Bottles  only, —  The  caps  of  all  bottles  containing  Grade 
"A"'  milk  or  cream  (pasteurized)  shall  be  white  with  the  grade  and  desig- 
nation '*  Grade  A  (pasteurized)/"  the  name  and  address  of  the  dealer,  the  date 
and  hours  between  which  pasteurization  wras  completed,  and  the  place  .where 
pasteurization  was  performed,  clearly,  legibly,  and  conspicuously  displayed 
on  the  outer  side  thereof.  No  other  word,  statement,  design,  mark,  or  de- 
vice shall  appear  on  that  part  of  the  outer  cap  containing  the  grade  and 
designation,  unless  authorized  and  permitted  by  the  Department  of  Health. 
A  proof  print  or  sketch  of  such  cap,  showing  the  size  and  arrangement  of 


708 

the  lettering  thereon,  shall  be  submitted  to  and  approved  by  the  said  Depart- 
ment before  being  attached  to  the  bottles  containing  milk  of  the  said  grade 
and  designation.  No  other  words,  statement,  design,  or  device  shall  appear 
upon  the  outer  cap  unless  approved  by  the  Department  of  Health.  The  size 
and  arrangement  of  lettering  on  such  cap  must  be  approved  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  Health. 

Regulation  125.  Pasteurization. —  Only  such  milk  or  cream  shall  be  re- 
garded as  pasteurized  as  has  been  subjected  to  a  temperature  of  from  142 
to  145  degrees  F.  for  not  less  than  thirty  minutes. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  SALE  OF  GRADE  "B" 

MILK  OR  CREAM  (Pasteurized). 

Definition. —  Grade  "B"  milk  or  cream  (pasteurized)  is  milk  or  cream  pro- 
duced and  handled  in  accordance  with  the  minimum  requirements  of  the 
Regulations  herein  set  forth  and  which  has  been  pasteurized  in  accordance 
with  the  Regulations  of  the  Department  of  Health  for  pasteurization. 

Regulation  128.  Physical  examination  of  cows. —  All  cows  producing  milk 
or  cream  of  this  designation  must  be  healthy  as  determined  by  a  physical 
examination  made  and  approved  by  a  duly  licensed  veterinarian. 

Regulation  129.  Bacterial  contents. —  No  milk  under  this  designation  shall 
contain  more  than  100,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  and  no  cream  shall  contain  more 
than  500,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  when  delivered  to  the  consumer,  or  at  any 
time  after  pasteurization  and  prior  to  such  delivery.  No  milk  supply 
averaging  more  than  1,500,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  shall  be  pasteurized  in  this 
city  under  this  designation.  No  milk  supply  averaging  more  than  300,000 
bacteria  per  c.  c.  shall  be  pasteurized  outside  the  city  of  New  York  to  be  sold 
in  said  city  under  this  designation. 

Regulation  130.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  Dairies  producing  milk  or  cream  of 
this  designation  shall  score  at  least  20  points  on  equipment  and  35  points 
on  methods,  or  a  total  score  of  55  points  on  an  official  score  card  approved  by 
tihe  Department  of  Health. 

Regulation  131.  Time  of  delivery. —  Milk  of  this  designation  shall  be  de- 
livered within  36  hours.  Cream  shall  be  delivered  within  seventy-two  (72) 
hours  after  pasteurization.  Cream  intended  for  manufacturing  purposes  may 
be  stored  in  cold  storage  and  held  thereat  in  bulk  at  a  temperature  not 
higher  than  32  degrees  F.  for  a  period  conforming  with  the  laws  of  the  State 
of  New  York.  Such  cream  shall  be  delivered  in  containers,  other  than 
bottles,  within  twenty-four  (24)  hours  after  removal  from  cold  storage  and 
shall  be  used  only  in  the  manufacture  of  products  in  which  cooking  is  re- 
quired. 

Regulation  132.  Bottling. —  Milk  of  this1  designation  may  be  delivered  in 
cans  or  bottles. 

Regulation  133.  Labelling, —  The  caps  of  all  bottles  containing  Grade 
"B"  milk  (pasteurized)  and  the  tags  attached  to  all  cans  containing  Grade 
"B"  milk  or  cream  (pasteurized)  shall  be  white  with  the  grade  and  designa- 
tion "Grade  B  (pasteurized),"  the  name  and  address  of  the  dealer,  and  the 
date  when  and  place  where  pasteurization  was  performed,  clearly,  legibly,  and 


709 

conspicuously  displayed  on  the  outer  side  thereof.  The  caps  of  all  bottles 
containing  Grade  "  B  "  cream  (pasteurized)  shall  be  white  with  the  grade 
and  designation  "Grade  B  Cream  (pasteurized),"  the  name  >and  address  of 
the  dealer,  and  the  date  when  and  the  place  where  bottled,  clearly,  legibly,  and 
conspicuously  displayed  on  the  outer  side  thereof.  No  other  word,  statement, 
design,  mark,  or  device  shall  appear  on  that  part  of  the  outer  cap  or  tag 
containing  the  grade  and  designation  unless  authorized  and  permitted  by  the 
Department  of  Health.  A  proof  print  or  sketch  of  such  cap  or  tag,  showing 
the  size  and  arrangement  of  the  letteing  thereon  shall  be  submitted  to  and 
approved  by  the  said  Department  before  being,  attached  to  any  receptacle 
containing  milk  or  cream  of  the  said  grade  and  designation. 

Regulation  134.  Pasteurization. —  Only  such  milk  or  cream  shall  be  re- 
garded as  pasteurized  as  has  been  subjected  to  a  temperature  of  from  142 
to  145  degrees  F.  for  not  less  than  thirty  minutes. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  SALE  OF  GRADE  "C" 
MILK  OR  CREAM  (PASTEURIZED)  (FOR  COOKING  and  MANUFAC- 
TURING PURPOSES  ONLY). 

Definition. —  Grade  "C"  milk  or  cream  is  milk  or  cream  not  conforming 
to  the  requirements  of  any  of  the  subdivisions  of  Grade  "  A  "  or  Grade  "  B  " 
and  which  has  been  pasteurized  according  to  the  Regulations  of  the  Board 
of  Health  or  boiled  for  at  least  two  minutes. 

Regulation  136.  Physical  examination  of  cows. —  All  cows  producing  milk 
or  cream  of  this  designation  must  be  healthy,  as  determined  by  a  physical 
examination  made  by  a  duly  licensed  veterinarian. 

Regulation  137.  Bacterial  content. —  No  milk  of  this  designation  shall 
contain  more  than  300,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  and  no  cream  of  this  grade  shall 
contain  more  than  1,500,000  bacteria  per  c.  c.  after  pasteurization. 

Regulation  138.  Scoring  of  dairies. —  Dairies  producing  milk  or  cream  of 
this  designation  must  score  at  least  40  points  on  an  official  score  card  ap- 
proved by  the  Department  of  Health. 

Regulation  139.  Time  of  delivery. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation 
shall  be  delivered  within  72  hours  after  pasteurization. 

Regulation  140.  Bottling. —  Milk  or  cream  of  this  designation  shall  be 
delivered  in  cans  only. 

Regulation  141.  Labelling. —  The  tags  attached  to  all  cans  containing 
Grade  "C"  milk  (for  cooking)  shall  be  white  with  the  grade  and  designation 
"Grade  C  Milk  (for  cooking),'*  the  name  and  address  of  the  dealer,  and  the 
date  when  and  place  where  pasteurization  was  performed,  clearly,  legibly, 
and  conspicuously  displayed  thereon.  No  other  word,  statement,  design, 
mark,  or  device  shall  appear  on  that  part  of  the  tag  containing  the  grade 
and  designation,  unless  authorized  and  permitted  by  the  Department  of 
Health.  A  proof  print  or  sketch  of  such  tag,  showing  the  size  and  arrange- 
ment of  the  lettering  thereon  shall  be  submitted  to  and  approved  by  the 
said  Department  before  being  attached  to  the  cans  containing  milk  of  the 
said  grade  and  designation.  The  cans  shall  have  properly  sealed  metal  covers 
painted  red. 


710 

Regulation  142.  Pasteurization. —  Only  such  milk  or  cream  shall  be 
regarded  as  pasteurized  as  has  been  subjected  to  a  temperature  of  145  degrees, 
for  not  less  than  thirty  minutes. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  SALE  OF  CONDENSED 

SKIMMED  MILK. 

Definition. —  Condensed  skimmed  milk  is  condensed  milk  in  which  the 
butter  fat  is  less  than  twenty-five  (25)  per  cent,  of  the  itotal  milk  solids. 

Regulation  145.  Cans  to  be  painted  blue. —  The  cans  containing  condensed 
skimmed  milk  shall  be  colored  a  bright  blue  and  shall  bear  the  words  "  Con- 
densed Skimmed  Milk"  in  block  letters  at  least  two  inches  high  and  two 
inches  wide,  with  a  space  of  at  least  one-half  inch  between  any  two  letters. 
The  milk  shall  be  delivered  to  the  person  to  whom  sold,  in  can  or  cans,  as 
required  in  this  regulation  excepting  when  sold  in  hermetically  sealed  cans. 

ADDITIONAL  REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  LABELLING  OF  MILK 
OR  CREAM  BROUGHT  INTO,  DELIVERED,  OFFERED  FOR  SALE  AND 
SOLD  IN  NEW  WORK  CITY. 

Regulation  146.  Labelling  of  milk  or  cream. —  Each  container  or  receptacle 
used  for  bringing  milk  or  cream  into  or  delivering  it  in  the  City  of  New 
York  shall  bear  a  tag  or  label  stating,  if  shipped  from  a  creamery  or  dairy, 
the  location  of  the  said  creamery  or  dairy,  the  date  of  shipment,  the  name 
of  the  dealer,  and  the  grade  of  the  product  contained  therein,  except  as  else- 
where provided  for  delivery  of  cream  in  bottles. 

Regulation  147.  Labelling  of  milk  or  cream  to  be  pasteurized. —  All  milk 
or  cream  brought  into  the  city  of  New  York  to  be  pasteurized  shall  have  a 
tag  affixed  to  each  and  every  can  or  other  receptacle  indicating  the  place  of 
shipment,  date  of  shipment,  and  the  words  "to  be  pasteurized  at  (stating 
location  of  pasteurizing  plants)." 

Regulation  148.  Mislabelling  of  milk  or  cream. —  Milk  or  cream  of  one 
grade  or  designation  shall  not  be  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale,  sold,  or  labelled 
as  milk  or  cream  of  a  higher  grade  or  designation. 

Regulation  149.     Word,  statement,  design,  mark  or  device  on  label. —  No 

word,  statement,  design,  mark,  or  device  regarding  the  milk  or  cream  shall 
appear  on  any  cap  or  tag  attached  to  any  bottle,  can,  or  other  receptacles 
containing  milk  or  cream  which  words,  statement,  design,  mark,  or  device  is 
false  or  misleading  in  any  particular. 

Regulation  150.  Tags  ttf  be  saved. —  As  soon  as  the  contents  of  such  con- 
tainer or  receptacle  are  sold,  or  before  the  said  container  is  returned  or  other- 
wise disposed  of,  or  leaves  the  possession  of  the  dealer,  the  tag  thereon  shall 
be  removed  and  kept  on  file  in  the  store,  where  such  milk  or  cream  has  been 
sold,  for  a  period  of  two  months  thereafter,  for  inspection  by  the  Department 
of  Health. 

Regulation  151.  Record  of  milk  or  cream  delivered. —  Every  wholesale 
dealer  in  the  city  of  New  York  shall  keep  a  record  in  his  main  office  in  the 
said  city,  which  shall  show  from  which  place  or  places  milk  or  cream, 


711 

delivered  by  him  daily  to  retail  stores  in  the  city  of  New  York,  has  been 
received  and  to  whom  delivered,  and  the  said  record  shall  be  kept  for  a 
period  of  two  months,  for  inspection  by  the  Department  of  Health,  and  shall 
be  readily  accessible  to  the  inspectors  of  the  said  Department  at  all  times. 

REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  MAINTENANCE  AND  OPERATION  OF 

CREAMERIES,  RECEIVING  STATIONS  AND  PASTEURIZING  PLANTS. 

CONSTRUCTION. 

1.  Sufficient  light  and  ventilation  to  be  provided. —  All  rooms  in  which 
milk  or  cream  is  pasteurized  or  otherwise  handled,   and  in  which  utensils, 
apparatus  and  containers  are  washed,  must  be  properly  lighted  and  provided 
with   suitable  ventilation.     Vent   pipes  extending  above  the  roof   should  be 
installed  for  carrying  away  excess  steam. 

2.  Construction  of  floor. —  Floors  of  all  rooms  must  be  constructed  of  con- 
crete or  some  equally  non-absorbent  material.     They  must  be  watertight  and 
so  graded  that  all  drainage  will  flow  toward  one  or  more  points  of  discharge. 

3.  Drainage. —  All  drains  must  be  suitably  trapped,   and   drainage  when 
not  discharged  into  city  sewers,  must  be  disposed  of  into  cesspools,  septic 
tanks,  running  brooks  or  creeks,  or  conveyed  by  drains  to  a  point  at  least 
500  feet  from  the  building. 

4.  Construction  of  walls  and   ceilings. —  Walls  and  ceilings,  unless   con- 
structed of  concrete,  smooth  brick  or  tile,  must  be  sheathed,  dusttight,  and 
painted  with  a  light-colored  paint. 

5.  Doors  and  windows  to  be  screened. —  All  outside  doors  and  windows 
must  be  screened  against  flies  from  May  1  to  October  31. 

6.  Doors  to  be  provided  with  self-closing  device. —  All  doors  must  be  pro- 
vided with  self-closing  devices. 

7.  Toilet  facilities  to  be  provided.     Location  of  privies. —  Suitable  toilet 
facilities  must  be  provided  for  the  use  of  employees,  but  no  watercloset  shall 
communicate  directly  with   any  rooms  used  for  handling  milk  or  cream,  or 
with  any  room  in  which  utensils  are  washed.     Privies  or  earth  closets  must 
be  situated  at  least  100  feet  from  the  building  and  must  have  fly-proof  vaults. 
Seat  covers  must  be  self-closing. 

8.  Rooms   to   be   used   in   receiving   and   dumping   milk. —  Milk   must   be 
received  and  dumped  in  rooms  used  for  no  other  milk  handling. 

9.  Rooms  to  be  used  for  washing  containers. —  The  washing  of  containers 
should  not  be  conducted   in   rooms   in  which   milk   or   cream  is  handled.     If 
such  washing  is  done  in  the  same  rooms,  it  must  not  be  carried  on  during 
the  period  of  milk  handling. 

10.  Milk  or  cream  not  to  be  handled  in  room  used  for  living  purposes. — 
Xo  stable  and  no  room  us<'d  for  living  or  domestic  purposes  shall  communicate 
directly  with  any  room  in  which  milk  or  cream  is  handled  or  in  which  utensils 
are  \vashed. 

11.  Water  supply. —  An  adequate  supply  of  pure  running  water  must  be 
provided. 

EQUIPMENT. 

12.  Construction  of  apparatus. —  All  weigh  cans,  storage  vats,  mixing  vats, 
and   other   apparatus    must   be   constructed   of   suitable   metal,   preferably   of 
tinned   copper,   all   angles    and   joints   being  smoothly    soldered.      They    must 
be  provided  with  closely  fitting  metal  covers  of  similar  material. 


712 

13.  Construction  of  pipes  and  pumps. —  All  milk  pipes  and  pumps  must 
be  of  sanitary  construction  and  so  arranged  that  they  may  be  easily  taker, 
apart  for  cleaning.     The  use  of  tightly  soldered  elbow  joints  is  prohibited. 

14.  Arrangement  of  piping  when  continuous  holder  is  used. —  If  a  continu- 
ous type  of  milk  or  cream  pasteurizing  holder  is  provided,  which  consists  of 
a  series  of  tanks,  the  piping  must  be  so  arranged  that  the  lower  tank  is 
rilled  first. 

15.  Automatic  temperature  recording  devices  to  be  provided. —  At  every 
milk  or  cream   pasteurizing  plant,   automatic  temperature  recording  devices 
must   be  installed   which   will   indicate   the   temperature  to   which   the   milk 
or  cream  has  been  heated,  the  time  at  which  such  heating  has  been  performed, 
and,  if  possible,  the  length  of  time  for  which  the  milk  or  cream  is  held  at  the 
required  temperature. 

16.  Location  of  temperature  recorder. —  The  temperature  recorder  must  be 
attached  at  the  highest  point  of  the  outlet  from  a  continuous  holder.     If  an 
absolute  holder  is  used,  the  recorder  must  be  so   attached  as  to  show   the 
temperature  and  the  time  of  holding. 

17.  Washing   facilities   for   cans   and   bottles   to   be   provided. —  Suitable 
facilities  must  be  provided  for  washing,  rinsing  in  cold  water,  and  sterilizing 
cans  and  bottles  used  for  pasteurizing  milk  or  cream. 

18.  Racks  or  can  dryers  must  be  provided. —  Racks,  constructed  preferably 
of  metal,  must  be  provided  for  the  storage  of  washed  cans>  in  an  inverted 
position  until  filled,  unless  dryers  are  employed  during  the  sterilizing  of  cans 
and  can  covers. 

19.  Washed  bottles  to  be  inverted. —  All  washed  bottles  must  be  stored 
in  an  inverted  position  until  filled,  or  must  be  so  protected  as  to  prevent 
contamination. 

20.  Surface  coolers  to  be  protected. — Surface  coolers  must  be  provided 
with  suitable  metal  covers  unless  located  in  a  room  used  for  no  other  purpose. 

21.  Bottling  of  milk. —  No  milk  shall  be  bottled  unless  the  process  be  so 
conducted  as  to  preclude  its  contamination. 

METHODS. 

22.  Rooms  to  be  kept  clean.    Smoking  and  spitting  prohibited. —  All  room? 
and   surrounding   premises   must   be   maintained   in   a   cleanly   and    sanitary 
condition.     Smoking  and  spitting  within  the  building  must  be  prohibited. 

23.  Water  and-  steam  pipes  to  be  painted. —  All  water  and  steam  pipes 
must  be  kept  free  from  rust  and  dirt  and  must  be  painted. 

24.  Oil  cup  or  pan  to  be  provided  under  bearngs  for  shafting. —  All  bear- 
ings for  shafting  must  be  provided  with  suitable  oil  cups  or  pans. 

25.  Bottle  caps  before  use  to  be  protected. —  Bottle  caps  must  be  protected 
from  contamination  until  used. 

26.  Garments  worn  by  employees. —  Clean,  washable  outer  garments  must 
be  worn  by  employees  while  handling  milk  or  cream. 


713 

27.  Milk  or  cream  to  be  cooled  within  30  minutes  after  pasteurization. —  All 
milk  or  cream  must  be  cooled  after  pasteurization  to  a  temperature  of  50 
degrees  or  less  within  30  minutes. 

28.  Apparatus  to  be  cleaned  and  sterilized  immediately  after  use. —  All 
apparatus  used  for  handling  milk  or  cream  must  be  thoroughly  cleaned  and 
sterilized  immediately  after  use.     All  apparatus  used  in  the  pasteurizing  of 
milk     and    cream    must     be    sterilized     immediately    before    the    process    is 
commenced. 

29.  Temperature  records  to  be  made  daily  and  kept  on  file. —  Temperature 
records  must  be  made  daily  and  be  kept  on  file  as  long  as  required  by  the 
Department  of  Health. 

30.  Milk   or   cream   to    be   regarded   as   pasteurized   to   be   subjected   to 
temperature  of   142-145  degrees  for  not  less  than  30  minutes. —  Only  such 
milk  or  cream  shall  be  regarded  as  pasteurized  as  has  been  subjected  to  a 
temperature  of  142-145  degrees  for  not  less  than  30  minutes. 

GENERAL. 

31.  Containers  to  be  tagged  or  labeled. —  All  containers  in  which  pasteur- 
ized milk  or  cream  is  delivered  shall  be  plainly  tagged  or  labeled  "  Pasteurized  " 
and  the  said  tags  or  labels  shall  be  marked  in  accordance  with  rules  set  forth 
for  each  grade. 

32.  Only  pasteurized  milk  or  cream  conforming  to  regulations  to  be  sold. — 
Milk  or  cream  which  has  been  heated  in  any  degree  will  not  be  permitted  to 
be  sold  in  the  city  of  New  York  unless  the  heating  conforms  with  the  regula- 
tions of  the  Department  of  Health  for  the  pasteurization  of  milk  or  cream. 

33.  Apparatus  to  be  approved. — Permits  will  not  be  granted  to  pasteurize 
milk  or  cream  unless  all  apparatus  connected  with  said  pasteurizing  has  been 
approved  by  the  Department  of  Health. 

34.  Permits  to  pasteurize  required. —  No  milk  or  cream  shall  be  sold,  held, 
kept  and  offered  for  sale  in  the  city  of  New  York  as  "  Pasteurized  "  unless* 
said  milk  or  cream  has  been  pasteurized  under  permit  from  the   Board   of 
Health   in  conformity   with   the   rules   and  regulations   thereof. 

35.  Milk  or  cream  not  to  be  pasteurized  a  second  time. —  No  milk  or  cream 
shall  be  pasteurized  a  second  time. 

36.  Pasteurized  milk  to  be  bottled  at  place  of  pasteurization. —  Pasteurized 
milk  shall  not  be  held,  kept,  offered  for  sale,  or  sold  in  bottles  unless  such 
milk  has  been  bottled  at  the  place  of  pasteurization. 

37.  Room  and  apparatus  used  for  the  pasteurization  of  Grade  A  milk. — 
Milk  or  cream  shall  not  be  received  in  any  room  or  apparatus  where  Grade 
A  pasteurized  milk  or  cream  is  handled  and  treated,  unless  the  said  milk  or 
cream  complies  with  the  Regulations  for  Grade  A  pasteurized  milk. 

REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  TUBERCULIN  TESTING  OF  CATTLE. 

Regulation  1.  Manner  of  testing. —  In  the  case  of  any  herd  which  is  found, 
when  tested  in  accordance  with  these  regulations,  to  be  free  from  tuberculosis, 
the  next  general  test  of  the  herd  shall  be  made  within  twelve  (12)  months. 
Any  herd  in  which  one  or  more  reactors  shall  have  been  found,  shall  be 


714 

retestcd  with  tuberculin  within  six  (6)  months,  and  every  reacting  animal 
shall  bo  excluded  from  the  herd.  Tuberculin  tests  shall  be  made  as  follows: 
During  the  ten  (10)  hours  before  injection,  four  (4)  pre-injection  tempera- 
tures shall  be  taken  at  intervals  of  three  (3)  hours.  The  first  post-injection 
temperature  shall  be  taken  not  later  than  six  (6)  hours  after  injection; 
thereafter  temperature  shall  be  taken  at  intervals  of  two  (2)  hours,  continu- 
ing for  not  less  than  twenty-four  (24)  hours  after  injection. 

Regulation  2.  Herds  to  be  retested. —  If  more  than  ten  per  cent.  (10%)  of 
the  herd  react  to  the  tuberculin  test,  the  entire  herd  shall  be  retested  with 
tuberculin  upon  the  expiration  of  ninety  (90)  days  and  each  animal  so  re- 
tested  shall  receive  a  double  dose  of  tuberculin  at  this  test. 

Regulation  3.  Reactions  and  suspicious  reactions. —  A  rise  of  2  degrees  over 
the  highest  pre-injection  temperature  shall  be  considered  a  reaction,  provided 
such  rise  of  temperature  cannot  be  shown  to  be  due  to  some  other  cause.  A 
rise  of  iy2  degrees  F.  in  which  there  are  consecutive  temperatures  above  the 
normal  extending  over  three  (3)  or  more  intervals,  shall  be  considered  a  sus- 
picious reaction,  and  an  animal  having  so  reacted  shall  be  removed  from  the 
herd.  The  interpretation  of  the  "  temperature  curve  "  shall  be  left  to  the 
discretion  of  the  veterinarian  making  the  test  subject  to  the  approval  of  the 
Department  of  Health,  provided,  however,  that  such  veterinarian  shall  be  a 
legally  licensed  veterinarian  whose  tests  are  acceptable  to  the  Department 
of  Agriculture  of  the  State  of  New  York.  A  full  report  of  the  test  shall  be 
made  on  a  chart  approved  by  the  Department  of  Health,  which  chart  shall 
state  the  kind  and  quality  of  tuberculin  used  in  each  test,  the  dates  and  hours 
at  which  temperatures  were  taken,  a  description  of  the  animals  tested,  and 
the  numbers  of  the  tags  attached  to  the  same,  and  said  report  shall  be  duly 
signed  by  the  veterinarian  making  the  test  and  submitted  to  the  Department 
of  Health,  and  by  the  Department  of  Health  placed  on  file  for  inspection  and 
record. 

REGULATIONS  GOVERNING  THE  USE  OF  A  DIRT  TESTER. 
Regulation  1.     Dirt  tester. —  A  dirt  tester  approved  by  the  Department  of 
Health  of  the  city  of  New  York,  must  be  used  in  all  creameries  shipping  milk 
to  the  city  of  New  York. 

Regulation  2.  Milk  to  be  tested. —  All  milk  received  at  any  creamery 
shipping  milk  as  aforesaid  must  be  tested  thereat  by  the  person  having  the 
management  and  control  of  such  creamery,  at  least  once  a  week,  the  results 
of  such  test  to  be  posted  in  a  conspicuous  place  in  the  creamery  and  duplicates 
of  such  test  forwarded  to  the  Department  of  Health  at  the  end  of  each 
month. 

Regulation  3.  Standard  for  test. —  A  photograph  or  gauge  established  by 
the  Board  of  Health  of  the  city  of  New  York  must  be  used  as  a  standard  in 
the  creameries  herein  referred  to  in  determining  whether  milk  contains  ex- 
cessive dirt. 

Regulation  4.  Milk  below  standard. —  Where  the  maximum  of  dirt,  accord- 
ing to  the  standard  is  shown  to  habitually  exist  in  milk  officially  tested  by 
the  Department  of  Health,  at  any  creamery,  it  will  constitute  sufficient  cause 
to  either  rate  the  milk  as  Grade  C,  or  to  exclude  such  milk  from  sale  within 
the  city  of  New  York. 


REPORT 

OF 

XATIOXAL  COMMISSION  ox  MILK  STANDARDS 
1916 


[715] 


716 


REPORT  OF  NATIONAL  COMMISSION  ON  MILK 
STANDARDS,  1916 


The  whole  subject  of  milk  standards  is  reviewed  by  the  National 
Commission  on  Milk  Standards  in  its  last  report  which  has  not  yet 
been  given  to  the  press.  This  report  gives  the  history  of  the  move- 
ment on  the  part  of  health  officers  and  public  bodies  interested  in 
the  milk  supply.  A  proper  understanding  of  the  dairy  problems 
of  the  State  cannot  be  had  without  considering  and  understand- 
ing the  forces  which  operate  directly  upon  the  dairymen  through 
health  regulations.  It  also  indicates  the  trend  of  future  health 
regulations  which  the  dairymen  must  be  expected  to  meet.  In 
order  that  this  report  may  convey  such  information  to  the  Legis- 
lature and  the  dairymen  of  the  State,  it  is  thought  best  to  include 
that  part  bearing  on  these  subjects. 


717 


REPORT  OF  NATIONAL  COMMISSION  ON  MILK 
STANDARDS,  1916 

November  3,  1916. 
PEEAMBLE 

Purposes  of  Milk  Standards 

Proper  milk  standards  are  essential  to  efficient  milk  control  by 
public  health  authorities.  In  the  first  place  health  authorities  must 
ascertain  that  the  chemical  composition  corresponds  with  estab- 
lished definitions  of  milk  as  food.  But  their  more  important  duty 
is  to  prevent  the  transmission  of  disease.  This  means  the  preven- 
tion of  the  transmission  by  milk  of  infant  diarrhoea,  typhoid  fever, 
tuberculosis,  septic  throat  infections,  scarlet  fever,  diphtheria,  and 
other  infectious  diseases.  In  the  interests  of  milk  consumers  pub- 
lic health  authorities  must  take  positive  action  to  prevent  the  trans- 
mission of  any  of  these  diseases,  in  addition  to  their  duty  of  pre- 
serving the  food  value  of  milk. 

The  milk  producer  is  interested  in  proper  standards  for  milk, 
and  should  support  a  movement  to  secure  proper  standards,  for 
the  reason  that  these  contribute  to  the  well  being  and  dignity  of 
the  milk  industry  itself.  Proper  standards,  rightly  enforced, 
distinguish  between  the  good  milk  producer  and  the  bad  milk  pro- 
ducer. This  inevitably  will  lead  to  the  improvement  of  dairy 
farming,  and  eventually  to  an  increase  in  the  financial  prosperity 
of  the  milk  producer  himself  through  better  prices  for  better  milk. 
It  will  thus  enable  the  producer  to  get  properly  paid  for  the 
quality  of  milk  he  produces,  and  thus  put  that  industry  for  the 
first  time  upon  a  dependable  basis. 

The  milk  dealer  is  immediately  classified  by  milk  standards  into 
a  seller  of  first  class  milk  or  a  seller  of  second  class  milk,  and  such 
distinction  gives  to  the  seller  of  first  class  milk  a  commercial  re- 
ward which  he  deserves,  while  it  discriminates  justly  against  the 
seller  of  second  class  milk. 

For  milk  consumers  the  settling  of  definite  standards  accom- 
panied by  labeling  with  official  control  of  the  labels  makes  it  pos- 
sible to  know  the  character  of  the  milk  which  is  purchased,  and 
to  distinguish  good  milk  from  bad  milk.  The  establishment  of 


718 

standards  for  quality,  and  of  labels  on  retail  packages  indicating 
the  quality,  compels  the  industry  not  only  to  purchase  milk  on  a. 
quality  basis,  but  also  to  sell  milk  on  a  quality  basis.  The  selling 
of  milk  strictly  on  a  quality  basis,  which  includes  not  only  chemi- 
cal composition,  but  sanitary  character,  makes  it  possible  for  the' 
consumers  by  an  inspection  of  the  label  to  intelligently  select  milk: 
which  in  quality  and  price  is  most  suitable  for  their  needs. 

A  dministra  tiv  e  Equip  men  t 

Standards  are  useless  unless  properly  guarded  and  enforced. 
The  chief  objection  that  has  been  raised  to  a  grading  system  for 
milk  is  the  difficulty  of  ensuring  that  milk  labeled  as  of  a  certain 
grade  is  actually  of  that  grade  when  sold  to  the  consumer. 

The  prime  requisite  for  efficient  milk  control  is  that  health  de- 
partments shall  be  adequately  equipped  with  men,  money  and  lab- 
oratory facilities.  The  commission  is  of  the  opinion  that  satis- 
factory results  cannot  be  expected  from  laws  when  there  is  not. 
sufficient  appropriation,  and  Avhen  there  is  no  machinery  for  their 
enforcement.  A  survey  of  the  money  appropriated  for  milk  con- 
trol shows  that  in  the  majority  of  municipalities  this  is  entirely 
insufficient  for  public  needs. 

The  key  to  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  the  proper  use  of 
grade  labels  is  the  laboratory.  The  establishment  and  operation 
of  an  efficient  milk  testing  laboratory  is  commonly  supposed  to  bei 
an  item  of  great  expense.  This,  however,  the  commission  is  con- 
vinced, is  a  mistake,  since  there  are  numerous  laboratories  scattered 
all  over  the  land  not  only  private,  but  public,  which  are  inexpen- 
sive and  operated  at  low  cost.  By  efficiency  methods  a  large 
number  of  tests  can  be  made  at  a  very  low  cost.  Even  small  com- 
munities can  afford  to  maintain  and  operate  such  laboratories. 
Where  for  any'  reason  it  is  not  possible  to  do  this,  it  has  provem 
to  be  practicable  for  one  community  to  enter  into  laboratory 
arrangements  with  another,  arid  even  several  can  combine  in  the* 
use  of  "a  'common  laboratory. 

Grading  of  Milk  .  -     .-      - 

There  is  no  escape  from  the  conclusion  that  milk  on  the  market 
must  be  graded,  just  as  other  commodities  such  as  wheat,  grain, 
beef,  -etc.,  are  graded.  The  milk  merchant  must  judge  not  only 


719 

of  the  food  value,  but  also  of  the  sanitary  characteristics  of  the 
commodity  in  which  he  deals.  There  is  no  good  reason  for  believ- 
ing that  fruit  beginning  to  decay  is  particularly  unhealthful,  but 
it  should  not  be  sold  on  a  par  with  sound  fruit.  Small  apples 
have  as  much  food  value  as  an  equal  quantity  of  large  ones,  but 
the  latter  properly  command  a  higher  price.  So,  too,  with  milk; 
the  high-grade  product,  fresh  and  cold,  will  cost  more  to  buy  from 
the  producer,  and  should  sell  for  more  to  the  consumer  than  does 
the  low-grade  product.  The  Commission's  most  important  work 
has  been  the  attempt  to  separate  milk  into  grades  and  classes.  The 
Commission  has  endeavored  to  make  its  grading  system  as  simple 
as  possible,  and  at  the  same  time  to  distinguish  between  milks 
which  are  essentially  different  in  their  sanitary  and  other  charac- 
ter. The  Commission  is  convinced  that  the  experience  of  the  last 
three  years  has  fully  demonstrated  the  value  of  the  grading  system 
in  the  communities  in  which  it  has  already  been  applied,  both  from 
a  public  health  and  an  economic  standpoint.  The  Commission 
believes  that  the  grading  of  milk  offers  a  satisfactory  solution  for 
most  of  the  sanitary  and  economic  problems  which  have  hitherto 
prevented  efficient  milk  control,  and  that  it  is  feasible  for  small 
communities  as  well  as  large  communities  to  adopt  a  grading 
system  and  to  secure  its  benefits. 

CHIEF  SUBJECTS  CONSIDERED 

The  Commission  during  its  deliberations,  over  a  period  of  five 
years  and  on  the  occasions  of  its  eight  meetings,  and  the  numerous 
meetings  of  its  subcommittees,  has  given  attention  to  a  great 
variety  of  subjects. 

The  more  important  conclusions  it  has  reached  are  the  following: 

(1)  CHEMICAL  STANDARDS  FOR  MILK 

The  lack  of  uniformity  in  chemical  standards  used  by  different 
municipalities  and  States  throughout  the  United  States  and  Canada 
has  led  the  Commission  to  believe  that  it  is  desirable  for  them  to 
give  expression  to  their  opinion  concerning  proper  chemical  stand- 
ards for  milk.  The  Commission  recognizes  that  chemical  standards 
do  not  involve  public  health  questions  excepting  in  so  far  as  they 
safeguard  the  food  value  of  milk.  Nevertheless,  as  milk  is  a  food, 


720 

chemical  standards  are  necessary  for  defining  its  nutritive  value. 

The  chemical  standards  suggested  are  the  work  of  a  special 
committee,  composed  of  chemists,  which  has  carefully  considered 
the  natural  composition  of  milk,  as  Avell  as  the  Federal  and  State 
standards  already  established.  The  standard  of  3.25  per  cent  fat 
and  8.5  per  cent  solids-not-fat,  here  proposed,  is  in  accordance  with 
the  recommendations  of  the  Association  of  Official  Agricultural 
Chemists,  and  has  been  adopted  by  the  United  States  Department 
of  Agriculture,  and  by  a  larger  number  of  States  than  has  any 
other  standard.  (The  word  "  standard  "  used  in  connection  with 
milk  is  not  intended  to  imply  excellence,  but  simply  to  express  the 
lowest  possible  standard  or  limit  that  the  law  permits  for  a  pure 
or  normal  milk.  The  same  meaning  applies  to  the  word  used  in 
connection  with  milk  products.) 

The  Babcock  test  makes  easily  practicable  the  determination 
of  fat  and  solids-not-fat  in  milk.  Such  examinations  of  milk  can 
be  readily  adopted  and  executed  by  any  health  board  laboratory 
at  a  very  moderate  expense.  It  is  believed  that  such  chemical 
standards  as  are  suggested  will  help  to  raise  the  standards  of  dairy- 
ing in  this  country,  and  that  the  provision  regarding  substandard 
milk  is  a  liberal  one. 

Cow's  Milk 

Standard  milk  should  contain  not  less  than  8.5  per  cent  of  solids- 
not-fat,  and  not  less  than  3.25  per  cent  of  milk-fat. 

Skim-milk 

Standard  skim-milk  should  contain  not  less  than  8.75  per  cent 
of  milk-solids. 

Cream 

Standard  cream  should  contain  not  less  than  18  per  cent  of 
milk-fat,  and  should  be  free  from  all  constituents  foreign  to  normal 
milk.  The  percentage  of  milk-fat  in  cream  over  or  under  that 
standard  should  be  stated  on  the  label. 

Adjusted  Milks 

On  the  question  of  milks  and  creams  in  which  the  ratio  of  the 
fat  to  the  solids-not-fat  has  been  changed  by  the  addition  to  or  sub- 
traction of  cream  or  milk-fat,  the  Commission  has  hestitated  to 


721 

take  a  position.  On  the  one  hand  they  are  in  favor  of  every  proce- 
dure which  will  increase  the  market  for  good  milk  and  make  the 
most  profitable  use  of  every  portion  of  it.  On  the  other,  they 
recognize  the  sensitiveness  of  milk,  the  ease  with  which  it  is  con- 
taminated, and  the  difficulty  of  controlling  such  processes  as  stand- 
ardizing, skimming,  homogenizing,  souring,  adjusting,  etc.,  so  as 
to  prevent  contamination  and  the  use  of  inferior  materials.  On 
this  subject  the  Commission  passed  a  resolution  presented  by  a 
special  committee,  as  follows: 

'  The  Committee  believes  that  it  is  probably  necessary  to 
admit  standardized  and  adjusted  milk.  They  believe  that 
such  manipulation  should  be  controlled,  and  that  such  milk 
should  be  distinctly  labeled  as  to  its  modifications."  "  Milk 
in  which  the  ratio  of  the  fat  to  the  solids-not-fat  has  been 
changed  by  the  addition  to  or  subtraction  of  cream  should  be 
labeled  '  adjusted  milk;'  the  label  should  show  the  minimum 
guaranteed  percentage  of  fat  and  should  comply  with  the  same 
sanitary  or  chemical  requirements  as  for  milk  not  so  stand* 
ardized  or  modified." 

The  Committee  very  carefuly  considered  the  subject  of  the 
agitation  which  has  taken  place  regarding  percentage  of  solids-not- 
fat  due  to  the  fact  that  in  some  large  cities  much  of  the  milk 
contains  less  than  8.5  per  cent  solids-not-fat.  While  the  Commis- 
sion is  disposed  to  admit  that  these  conditions  may  exist,  yet  it 
believes  that  these  conditions  can  be  remedied,  if  not  immediately, 
at  least  gradually.  On  the  other  hand,  experience  has  shown  that 
to  lower  the  standard  would  in  a  few  years  result  in  the  lowering 
of  the  general  quality  of  the  milk  placed  on  the  market,  since 
commerce  always  tends  to  approach  the  minimum  standard.  The 
Commission  therefore  thinks  it  is  unwise  to  reduce  the  standard 
for  solids-not-fat  below  the  percentage  of  8.5.  In  those  communi- 
ties where  such  a  standard  cannot  be  rigidly  enforced  at  the  pres- 
ent time,  the  Commission  suggests  that  the  standard  be  gradually 
applied. 


722 

Regulation  of  Market  Milk  on  Basis  of  Guaranteed  Percentage 
Composition 

(a)  Sellers  of  milk  should  be  permitted  choice  of  one  of  two 
systems  in  handling  market  milk.    They  may  sell  milk ;  first,  under 
the  regular  standard ;  or,  second,  under  a  guaranteed  statement 
of  composition. 

(b)  Any  normal  milk  may  be  sold  if  its  percentage  of  fat  is 
stated.     In  case  the  percentage  of  fat  is  not  stated,  the  sale  should 
be  regarded  as  illegal  unless  the  milk  contains  at  least  3.2-5  per 
cent  of  milk-fat. 

(c)  As  a  further  protection  to  consumers,  it  is  desirable  that 
when  the  guaranty  system  is  used,  there  be  also  a  minimum  guar- 
anty of  milk-solids,  not  fat,  of  not  less  than  8.5  per  cent. 

(d)  Dealers  electing  to  sell  milk  under  the  guaranty  system 
should  be  required  to  state  conspicuously  the  guaranty  on  all  con- 
tainers in  which  such  milk  is  handled  by  the  dealer  or  delivered 
to  the  consumer. 

(e)  The  sale  of  milk  on  a  guaranty  system  should  be  by  special 
permission  obtained  from  some  proper  local  authority. 

(2)  BACTERIA  AND  BACTERIAL  TESTING 

Bacteria  and  bacterial  testing  have  undoubtedly  occupied  more 
of  the  Commission's  time  than  any  other  subject,  this  topic  being 
considered  at  each  of  its  meetings.  Every  phase  of  the  relation- 
ship of  bacteria  to  the  sanitary  character  of  milk,  as  well  as  to  the 
infectious  diseases  transmissible  by  milk,  has  been  discussed  by 
the  seven  bacteriologists  who  are  members  of  the  Commission. 
The  significance  of  bacteria  in  milk  and  methods  of  bacterial 
testing  have  been  considered  in  detail,  not  only  from 
the  personal  standpoint  of  the  bacteriologist,  but  from  tho 
administrative  standpoint  of  the  eight  health  officers  who  are 
members  of  the  Commission,  as  well  as  the  two  agricultural 
experts.  Because  of  frequent  conferences  with  members  of  the 
dairy  industry,  as  well  as  a  knowledge  of  the  action  taken  by 
municipalities  on  this  subject,  it  is  believed  that  all  phases  of  the 
relationship  of  bacteria  to  milk  have  been  impartially  considered 


723 

and  that  the  conclusions  reached  fairly  represent  the  place  which 
bacterial  testing  should  occupy. 

The  Commission  recognizes  that  the  number  of  bacteria  in  milk 
is  controlled  in  the  majority  of  instances  by  three  factors;  dirt, 
temperature  or  age.  Only  in  the  minority  of  instances  are  the 
bacteria  of  specific  diseases  present.  The  routine  laboratory  meth- 
ods for  examining  milk  have  therefore  as  their  chief  purpose  the 
control  over  dirt,  temperature,  and  age.  The  difficulties  of  detect- 
ing the  specific  bacteria  of  disease  by  laboratory  methods  prevent 
laboratories  from  undertaking  such  detection  as  a  routine.  For 
this  reason  laboratory  methods  are  as  yet  of  little  value  in  safe- 
guarding milk  against  specific  diseases.  The  only  practical  way 
for  protecting  milk  from  infection  by  the  bacteria  of  infectious 
diseases  is  by  medical,  veterinary,  and  sanitary  inspection,  and  by 
pasteurization.  ^Nevertheless  the  Commission  believes  that  large 
numbers  of  bacteria  that  are  not  specific  disease  germs  have  a 
health  significance. 

The  routine  laboratory  methods  for  determining  the  total  num- 
bers of  bacteria  in  milk  are  believed  to  furnish  a  general  indication 
of  the  safety  of  milk.  Small  numbers  indicate  fresh  milk  produced 
under  cleanly  conditions,  and  kept  cool,  and  such  milk  is  safer 
than  milk  containing  large  numbers  of  bacteria  which  is  either 
dirty,  warm,  or  stale.  In  addition  to  this,  the  relation  which  large 
numbers  of  bacteria  bear  to  the  sanitary  character  of  milk  is  shown 
by  certain  facts,  among  which  the  following  are  worthy  of  mention : 

Relation  of  Large  Numbers  of  Bacteria  to  Infant  Mortality 

The  Commission  believes  that  the  numbers  of  bacteria  in  milk 
have  a  relation  to  the  infant  mortality,  for  the  following  reasons: 

(a)  Evidence  furnished  by  clinical  observations  of  groups  of 
children  fed  on  milk  containing  small  numbers  of  bacteria  and 
large  numbers  of  bacteria  shows  a  higher  death  rate  in  the  latter 
than  in  the  former.  ;  ...  . 

•  -.(b).  .In  geueraly  a  reductioia  in  infant  mortality  in  cities  results 
fronr,a  substitution. of  mi-Ik  containing-  small  numbers  of  .bacteria 
for  milk  containing  large  numbers  of  bacteria. 

(c)  Bacteria  causing  no  specific  intestinal  infections  in  adults 
may  cause  infant  diarrhoea,  and  milk  containing  large  number* 


of  bacteria  more  often  contains  species  capable  of  setting  up 
intestinal  inflammation  in  infants  than  milk  containing  small 
numbers  of  bacteria. 

Bacterial  Counts  and  Decency 

On  this  subject  the  Commission  passed  the  following  resolutions: 

(a)  Because  high  bacterial  counts  indicate  milk  is  either  warm, 
dirty,  or  stale,  the  bacterial  count  is  an  indicator  of  decency  in 
milk  character,  entirely  apart  from  its  significance  as  an  indicator 
of  the  safety  of  milk. 

(b)  In  determining  the  sanitary  character  of  milk  and  the  grade 
in  which  it  belongs,  decency  must  be  considered  as  desirable  for 
its  own  sake,   entirely  apart  from   the  consideration  of  safety. 
Decency  is  important  as  a  characteristic  of  foods  and  drinks  be- 
cause it  gives  pleasure  to  the  consumption  of  food,  while  the  lack 
of  decency  means  distaste,  displeasure,  and  even  disgust. 

(c)  The  bacterial  count  is  a  sufficiently  accurate  measure  of 
decency  to  justify  the  health  officer  in  condemning  milk  with  a 
high  bacterial  count  because  it  is  lacking  in  this  characteristic. 

Bacteriological  Laboratory  Testing  of  Milk 

On  the  subject  of  laboratory  examinations  of  milk  for  bacteria, 
the  Commission  believes  that  the  interests  of  public  health  de- 
mand that  the  control  of  milk  supplies,  both  as  to  production  and 
distribution,  should  include  regular  laboratory  examinations  of 
milk  by  bacteriological  methods.     They  stated  by  resolution  that: 
Among  present  available  routine  laboratory  methods  for 
determining  the  sanitary  quality  of  milk,  the  bacterial  count 
occupies  first  place,  and  that  bacterial  standards  should  be  a 
factor  in  classifying  milk  of  different  degrees  of  excellence. 

The  adoption  and  enforcement  of  bacterial  standards  will 
be  more  effective  than  any  other  one.  thing  in  improving  the 
sanitary  character  of  public  milk  supplies.  The  enforcement 
•  of -these  standards  can  be  carried  out  only  by  the  regular  and 
.frequent  laboratory  examinations  of  milk  for  the-  numbers 
of  bacteria  it  may  contain. 

It  is  of  the  utmost  importance  that  standard  methods  should 
be  adopted  by  all  laboratories  for  comparing  the  bacterial 


_  ;  .;-••*•  725 

character  of  milks,  since  by  this  means  only  is  it  possible  to 
grade  and  classify  milks  and  properly  enforce  bacterial 
standards. 

Concerning  the  methods  which  should  be  used  by  milk  labora- 
tories for  determining  the  numbers  of  bacteria,  the  Commission 
unanimously  resolved : 

That  there  be  adopted  as  standards  for  making  the  bac- 
terial count  the  standard  methods  of  the  American  Public 
Health  Association  Laboratory  Section. 

One  of  the  chief  objections  raised  against  pasteurization  is  the 
claim  that  it  is  frequently  employed  to  cover  filthy  methods,  the 
milk  producer  using  less  care  in  his  methods  if  he  knows  that  the 
milk  is  to  be  subsequently  pasteurized.  To  meet  this  objection  the 
Commission  believes  there  should  be  bacterial  standards  for  raw 
milk  as  well  as  bacterial  standards  for  pasteurized  milk.  In  the 
case  of  pasteurized  milk,  standards  should  be  required  of  the  milk 
before  pasteurization  as  well  as  after  pasteurization. 

Reliability  of  Bacterial  Tests 

The  Commission  has  considered  the  numerous  criticisms  that 
have  been  raised  as  to  the  unreliability  of  bacteriological  analysis, 
and  has  made  extensive  inquiry  as  to  the  force  of  these  criticisms. 
An  opinion  concerning  the  reliability  of  laboratory  tests  for  num- 
bers of  bacteria  has  been  reached  based  on  voluminous  statistics 
secured  for  the  most  part  by  groups  of  observers  working  together, 
as  well  as  by  individuals.  One  of  these  researches  alone  carried 
out  by  members  of  the  Commission  in  co-operation  with  others 
included  the  testing  of  over  20,000  samples  of  milk.  In  other  in- 
stances repeatedly  the  same  sample  of  milk  was  tested  100  times. 
Some  variations  in  the  analysis  of  duplicate  samples  are  inevitable, 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  bacteria  are  not  in  solution  but  are  floating 
in  the  milk,  more  or  less  clustered  together  in  clumps,  each  of  which 
will  count  only  as  a  single  colo<ny.  Under  such  conditions  only  an 
approximate  agreement  can  be  esp£cted. 

The  results  of  extensive  study  justify  the  Commission  in  the 
conclusion  that  the  analysis  of  duplicate  samples  of  milk  made  ty 
routine  methods  in  different  laboratories  may  be  expected  to 


726 

an  average  variation  of  about  28  per  cent,  with  occasional  samples 
of  wider  variation.  In  some  good  laboratories  the  variation  may 
not  be  greater  than  10  per  cent.  Variations  in  results  diminish 
with  the  number  of  samples  analyzed.  If  five  samples  of  the 
same  milk  are  tested,  the  results  may  be  relied  upon  as  fairly  ac- 
curate, and  always  sufficiently  accurate  to  place  any  particular  milk 
supply  unhesitatingly  in  Grade  A,  B,  or  C.  The  object  of  bacterial 
tests  of  milk  samples  for  the  number  of  bacteria  should  be  pri- 
marily to  determine  the  sanitary  character  of  the  milk  supply 
from  which  the  sample  is  taken,  rather  than  the  character  of  a 
single  sample  of  milk.  It  is  strongly  urged  by  this  Commission 
that  no  grading  of  milk  should  be  made  upon  the  analysis  of  single 
samples,  and  that  no  prosecutions  or  court  cases  should  be  brought 
upon  the  bacterial  analysis  of  a  single  sample  of  milk. 

Interpretation  of  Bacterial  Tests 

The  Commission  has  put  its  opinions  on  this  subject  in  the  form 
of  resolutions,  as  follows : 

WHEREAS,  Milk  is  one  of1  the  most  perishable  foods,  being 
extremely  susceptible  to  contamination  and  decomposition, 
and 

WHEREAS,  The  milk  consumer  is  justified  in  demanding 
that  milk  should  be  clean,  fresh  and  cold,  in  addition  to  having 
the  element  of  safety,  and 

WHEREAS,  Milk  which  is  from  healthy  cows  and  is  clean, 
fresh,  and  which  bas  been  kept  cold,  will  always  have  a  low 
bacterial  count,  and 

WHEREAS,  Milk  that  is  dirty,  stale,  or  has  been  left  warm, 
will  have  a  high  bacterial  count;  therefore  it  is  resolved: 

First':     That  the  health  officer  is  justified  in  using  the 
bacterial  count  as  an  indicator  of  the  degree  of  care  exercised 
"by  thp  producer  and  dealer  in  securing  milk  from  healthy  co^s 
"  "  'and  in  keeping  the  same  clean,  fresh  and  cold;  and 

"  Second:  That  the  health  officer  is' justified  in  condemning 
milk  with  a  high  bacterial  count  as'being Either  unhealthy _  or 
decomposed,  or  containing  dirt,  filth,  or  the  decomposed  ma- 
terial as  a  result  of  the  multiplication  of  bacteria  due  to  age 
and  temperature. 


727 

Third:  That  the  health  officer  is  justified  in  ruling  that 
large  numbers  of  bacteria  are  a  source  of  possible  danger,  and 
that  milk  containing  large  numbers  of  bacteria  is  to  be  classed 
as  unwholsome,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  the  bacteria  pres- 
ent are  of  harmless  type,  as  for  example,  the  lactic  acid  bac- 
teria in  buttermilk  or  other  especially  soured  milks. 

Grading  by  the  bacterial  count. 

Concerning  the  number  of  tests  which  should  be  made  in  order 
to  determine  the  grade  of  a  milk  supply,  the  Commission  recom- 
mends that  the  grade  into  which  a  milk  falls  shall  be  determined 
bacteriologically  by  at  least  five  consecutive  bacterial  counts,  taken 
over  a  period  of  not  less  than  one  week,  nor  more  than  one  month, 
and  that  at  least  four  out  of  five  of  these  counts  (80%)  must  fall 
below  the  limit  or  standard  set  for  the  grade  for  which  classifica- 
tion is  desired. 

The  grading  of  milk  has  necessarily  been  based  on  its  sanitary 
character,  primarily  as  determined  by  the  bacterial  test.  The  en- 
forcement of  grading,  therefore,  requires  the  application  of  the 
bacterial  test  in  a  manner  sufficiently  comprehensive  to  fairly  de- 
termine the  sanitary  character  of  milk  so  that  it  may  be  assigned 
to  the  grade  in  which  it  belongs.  Such  an  administrative  system 
greatly  modified  the  former  conception  of  milk  inspection  by  pub- 
lic health  officials.  The  inspection  service  under  the  grading  sys- 
tem becomes  subordinate  to  the  bacterial  laboratory,  or  at  least 
must  look  to  the  bacterial  laboratory  as  a  guide.  If  bacterial  tests 
are  recognized  as  an  indication  of  the  sanitary  character  of  milk, 
then  the  bacterial  laboratory  tests  should  precede  the  dairy  inspec- 
tion since  they  will  point  out  to  the  dairy  inspector  the  location  of 
unsanitary  milk.  In  the  enforcement  of  the  grading  system,  there- 
fore, the  milk  inspection  service  should  be  reorganized  in  such  a 
manner  that  the  bacterial  laboratory  makes  its  tests  first,  in. order 
to  determine  the  sanitary  character  of  the  various  milks  offered,  for 
sale  on  the  city  market,  and  the  inspection  service  then  takes  up 
the  task  of  discovering  the  location  and  causes  of  the  defects  which 
the  laboratory  has  discovered  and  remedying  them.  The  labora- 
tory service  and  inspection  service  consequently  must  be  central- 
ized under  one  head  and  their  work  thoroughly  co-ordinated  in 
order  to  give  the  greatest  economy  and  efficiency. 


728 

Bacterial  standards  far  cities  of  different  sizes. 

In  establishing  the  bacterial  standards  for  a  city  it  is  important 
to  take  into  consideration  the  necessary  age  of  the  milk,  the  dis- 
tance it  is  hauled,  and  the  methods  employed  in  its  hauling,  in 
addition  to  the  sanitary  condition  of  the  milk  at  its  source.  It 
will  always  be  possible  for  a  community  having  very  few  dairies, 
easily  controlled,  which  consumes  milk  produced  within  its  own 
limits,  or  within  transportation  of  twelve  hours  or  less  from  the 
sources  of  supply,  to  insist  upon  and  maintain  a  better  bacterial 
standard  than  can  a  city  where  the  milk  is  hauled  many  miles  into 
town  to  be  consumed  within  twenty-four  hours  after  it  is  produced 
from  numerous  dairies  difficult  to  control.  The  small  city,  for 
these  reasons  can  and  should  always  maintain  a  better  bacterial 
standard  than  the  large  city. 

Microscopic  Examination 

Under  certain  conditions  the  examination  of  milk  for  bacteria 
by  the  microscopic  method  serves  a  useful  purpose.  In  its  favor, 
it  has  the  advantage  of  quick  and  immediate  results  which,  in  the 
hands  of  reliable  workers,  have  proven  to  agree  remarkably  well 
with  the  results  obtained  by  the  plate  method.  At  times  it  gives 
useful  information  as  to  the  types  of  bacteria  present.  On  die 
other  hand,  the  microscopic  method  fails  to  distinguish  between 
dead  and  living  bacteria,  and  therefore  its  value  in  the  examina- 
tion of  pasteurized  milk  is  uncertain.  Its  chief  value  has  been 
in  securing  quick  information  regarding  the  character  of  raw 
milk,  and  for  this  reason  it  is  most  useful  at  the  producing  and 
shipping  end  of  the  line  rather  than  at  the  city  end. 

(3)  PASTEURIZATION 

The  pasteurization  of  milk  has  been  discussed  at  every  meeting 
held  by  the  Commission.  Its  effect  on  bacteria,  its  effect  on  milk, 
its  effect  on  public  health,  the  questions  of  time  and  temperature 
and  efficient  control  have  all  been  repeatedly  and  carefully  con- 
sidered in  detail.  It  is  believed  that  the  Commission  has  not 
neglected  to  take  into  account  any  of  the  important  contributions 
which  have  been  made  to  modern  knowledge  on  this  subject.  In 
connection  with  pasteurization,  the  Commission  has  also  carefully 


729 

considered  the  subject  of  the  degrees  of  safety  furnished  to  milk 
by  the  tuberculin  testing  of  cattle  and  medical  inspection  of  dairy 
employees. 

After  a  thorough  consideration  of  the  various  times  and  tem- 
peratures used,  and  different  forms  of  apparatus  recommended  by 
various  authorities,  the  Commission  decided  upon  the  following 
definition  of  pasteurization: 

"  That  pasteurization  of  milk  should  be  between  the  limits 
of  140  degrees  F.  and  155  degrees  F.  At  140  degrees  F.  the 
minimum  exposure  should  be  20  minutes.  For  every  degree 
above  140  degrees  F.  the  time  may  be  reduced  by  one  minute. 
In  no  case  should  the  exposure  be  for  less  than  5  minutes." 

In  order  to  allow  a  margin  of  safety  under  commercial  condi- 
tions, the  Commission  recommends  that  the  minimum  temperature 
during  the  period  of  holding  should  be  made  145  degrees  F.,  and 
the  holding  time  30  minutes. 

Regarding  the  methods  of  pasteurization,  the  Commission  be- 
lieves that  pasteurization  in  bulk  when  properly  carried  out  has 
proven  satisfactory,  but  that  pasteurization  in  the  final  container 
is  preferable. 

The  Commission  thinks  that  pasteurization  is  necessary  for  all 
milk,  excepting  Grade  A  raw  milk.  The  majority  of  the  Com- 
missioners voted  in  favor  of  the  pasteurization  of  all  milk,  includ- 
ing Grade  A  raw,  but  since  the  action  was  not  unanimous  the 
Commission  recommended  that  the  pasteurization  of  Grade  A  raw 
milk  be  optional. 

The  process  of  pasteurization  should  be  under  efficient  super- 
vision. The  supervision  should  consist  of  a  personal  inspection 
by  the  milk  inspector.  The  intervals  between  inspections  should  be 
not  more  than  one  month.  The  inspector  should  score  the  pasteur- 
izing plant  by  a  score  card. 

Specimens  of  milk  for  bacterial  analysis  should  be  taken  at  the 
different  stages  in  pasteurization  and  subsequent  handling. 

All  plants  handling  1,000  quarts  of  milk  or  more  a  day  should 
be  required  to  be  equipped  with  automatic  temperature  regulators, 
flow  regulators,  and  recording  thermometers.  The  records  of  these 
must  be  examined  by  the  Department  of  Health  not  less  often  than 
once  a  month. 


730 

Where  pasteurization  is  done  with  small  apparatus  not  so 
equipped,  the  proprietor  should  be  required  to  examine  the  tempera- 
ture of  the  milk  in  the  heater  at  the  first  and  last  of  each  run,  and 
keep  a  record  of  such  temperatures,  which  record  shall  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  Department  of  Health  not  less  often  than  once  a 
month. 

For  the  use  of  small  dealers  in  cities,  and  small  producers  for 
towns  and  villages,  efficient  pasteurizers  costing  less  than  $200 
are  available.  The  Commission,  therefore,  thinks  that  milk  ordi- 
nances for  towns  and  villages,  as  well  as  for  large  cities,  and  also 
State  milk  laws,  should  provide  compulsory  pasteurization,  except, 
for  Grade  A  raw  milk. 

The  efficiency  of  pasteurization  should  be  controlled  by  bacterial 
tests  before  and  after  heating. 

Scurvy  and  Pasteurization 

The  Commission  has  assumed  that  the  low  temperature  of  145 
degrees  F.  for  30  minutes  as  recommended  by  this  Commission 
for  pasteuriaztion  destroys  none  of  the  food  constituents  of  milk. 
Enquiry  conducted  by  the  £Tew  York  City  Department  of  Health 
into  the  records  of  the  infant  milk  depots,  where  sometimes  over 
25,000  infants  are  fed  daily  on  pasteurized  milk,  appears  to  bear 
out  this  assumption.  In  view  of  the  fact,  however,  that  recent 
hospital  experimental  studies  suggest  that  an  exclusive  diet  of 
pasteurized  milk  may  give  rise  to  a  sub-acute  scurvy  or  similar  nu- 
tritional disease' in  infants,  which  was  entirely  prevented,  and  even 
cured,  by  the  feeding  of  orange  juice  or  other  anti-scorbutic  food, 
the  Commission  recommends  that  orange  juice  be  added  to  the  diet 
of  infants  that  are  fed  on  pasteurized  milk.  The  Commission 
wishes  also  to  reaffirm  its  advocacy  of  the  adoption  of  pasteuriza- 
tion by  municipalities  as  a  public  health  measure. 

The  tuberculin  testing  of  dairy  coics 

The  Commission  has  noted  recent  developments  in  connection 
with  the  manner  of  administering  tuberculin  as  a  diagnostic  agent 
and  goes  on  record  as  approving  the  use  of  tuberculin  by  the  usual 
subcutaneous  method,  always,  however,  in  connection  with  physi- 
cal diagnosis,  and  with  due  regard  to  the  methods  prescribed  by 


731 

the  United  States  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry.  Other  methods  of 
using  tuberculin  should  be  regarded  still  as  under  judgment. 

The  Commission  believes  that  health  officers  should  encourage 
the  use  of  tuberculin  as  an  ideal  diagnostic  agent  when  in  proper 
hands,  and  extend  its  use  as  rapidly  as  possible,  realizing  its  prac- 
tical limitations  owing  to  the  enormous  number  of  cattle  and  their 
migrations  and  the  limited  number  of  veterinarians  qualified  to 
use  this  test.  :. 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  tuberculin  testing  is  a  means 
of  meeting  only  one  of  the  many  problems  of  milk  control. 

(4)  GRADES  OF  MILK 

The  Commission  believes  that  all  milk  should  be  classified  by 
dividing  it  into  three  grades,  which  shall  be  designated  by  the 
letters  of  the  alphabet.  It  is  the  sense  of  the  Commission  that  the 
essential  part  is  the  lettering  and  that  all  other  words  on  the  label 
are  explanatory.  In  addition  to  the  letters  of  the  alphabet  used 
on  caps  or  labels,  the  use  of  other  terms  may  be  permitted  so  long 
as  such  terms  are  not  the  cause  of  deception.  Caps  and  labels 
shall  state  whether  milk  is  raw  or  pasteurized.  The  letter  designat- 
ing the  grade  to  which  the  milk  belongs  shall  be  conspicuously  dis- 
played on  the  caps  of  bottles  or  the  labels  of  cans.  • 

The  requirements  for  the  three  grades  shall  be  as  follows : 

Grade  A 

Raw  milk.  Milk  of  this  class  shall  come  from  cows  free 
from  disease  as  determined  by  tuberculin  tests  and  physical 
examinations  by  a  qualified  veterinarian,  and  shall  be  pro- 
duced and  handled  by  employees  free  from  disease  as  deter- 
mined by  medical  inspection  of  a  qualified  physician,  under 
sanitary  conditions,  such  that  the  bacterial  count  shall  not 
exceed  10,000  per  cubic  centimeter  at  the  time  of  delivery  to 
the  consumer.  It  is  recommended  that  dairies  from  which 
this  supply  is  obtained  shall  score  at  least  eighty  on  the 
United  States  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  score  card. 

Pasteurized  milk.  Milk  of  this  class  shall  come  from  cows 
free  from  disease  as  determined  by  physical  examinations  by 


732 

a  qualified  veterinarian,  and  shall  be  produced  and  handled 
under  sanitary  conditions,  such  that  the  bacteria  count  at  no 
time  exceeds  200,000  per  cubic  centimeter.  All  milk  of  this 
class  shall  be  pasteurized  under  official  supervision,  and  the 
bacteria  count  shall  not  exceed  10,000  per  cubic  centimeter 
at  the  time  of  delivery  to  the  consumer.  It  is  recommended 
that  dairies  from  which  this  supply  is  obtained  shall  score  at 
least-  sixty-five  on  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Animal  In- 
dustry score  card. 

Grade  B 

Milk  of  this  class  shall  come  from  cows  free  from  disease 
as  determined  by  physical  examinations,  of  which  one  each 
year  shall  be  by  a  qualified  veterinarian,  and  shall  be  pro- 
duced and  handled  under  sanitary  conditions,  such  that  the 
bacteria  count  at  no  time  exceeds  1,000,000  per  cubic  centi- 
meter. All  milk  of  this  class  shall  be  pasteurized  under 
official  supervision,  and  the  bacteria  count  shall  not  exceed 
50,000  per  cubic  centimeter  when  delivered  to  the  consumer. 

It  is  recommended  that  dairies  producing  Grade  B  milk 
should  be  scored,  and  that  the  health  departments  or  the  con- 
trolling departments,  whatever  they  may  be,  strive  to  bring 
these  sources  up  as  rapidly  as  possible. 

Grade  C 

Milk  of  this  class  shall  come  from  cows  free  from  disease 
as  determined  by  physical  examinations,  and  shall  include  all 
milk  that  is  produced  under  conditions  such  that  the  bacteria 
count  is  in  excess  of  1,000,000  per  cubic  centimeter. 

All  milk  of  this  class  shall  be  pasteurized,  or  heated  to  a 
higher  temperature,  and  shall  contain  less  than  50,000  bac- 
teria per  cubic  centimeter  when  delivered  to  the  consumer. 

Whenever  any  large  city  or  community  finds  it  necessary, 
on  account  of  the  length  of  haul  or  other  peculiar  conditions, 
to  allow  the  sale  of  Grade  C  milk,  its  sale  shall  be  surrounded 
by  safeguards  such  as  to  insure  the  restriction  of  its  use  to 
cooking  and  manufacturing  purposes. 


733 

Grades  for  small  cities  and  towns 

This  Commission  recognizes  that,  because  of  climate,  size  of  the 
community,  nearness  to  the  sources  of  supply,  ease  of  transporta- 
tion and  progress  already  made  in  improving  the  general  milk 
supply,  and  in  educating  the  dairymen  and  the  public,  different 
communities  are  in  position  to  secure  varying  degrees  of 
excellence  in  their  standards  for  the  grades  of  milk.  This 
Commission,  therefore,  urges  that  its  standards  for  Grade  A, 
B,  and  C  milk  be  regarded  as  minimum  standards,  and  that 
any  community  may  adopt  higher  requirements  for  its  grades  if 
its  conditions  make  this  feasible  and  desirable. 

As  a  guide  to  health  officers  in  the  establishment  of  grades  best 
adapted  for  their  local  communities,  the  following  general  broad 
principles  are  offered : 

(1)  A  careful  preliminary  survey  of  the  milk  situation  should 

be  made  before  the  requirements  of  the  several  grades 
are  adopted. 

(2)  No  matter  how  excellent  the  general  milk  supply  of  a 

community,  it  is  not  all  of  a  single  standard  of  ex- 
cellence, hence  there  are  actually  different  grades  of 
milk  in  every  community,  and  the  recognition  of  such 
grades  is  always  advantageous. 

(3)  Grades  in  any  community  should  always  be  such  as  to 

separate  into  two,  or  at  most  three,  classes  the  milk 
supply  of  that  special  community.  Where  little  or 
nothing  has  been  done  towards  improving  the  general 
milk  supply,  it  may  be  desirable  to  adopt  temporary 
grades,  (but  not  below  the  minimum  requirements 
suggested  by  this  Commission),  with  a  time  limit  as 
to  when  more  rigid  requirements  for  the  grades  will  be 
enforced. 

(4-)  Grades  as  adopted  in  any  community  should  be  such  as 
not,  under  any  circumstances,  to  sanction  the  sale  of 
milk  below  the  minimum  standards  which  it  is  feasible 
for  that  community  to  require. 


734 

(5)  Whatever  departures  are  made  by  any  community  from 
the  exact  definition  of  grades  as  recommended  by  this 
Commission,  several  fundamental  principles  are  recog- 
nized by  the  Commission  as  of  universal  application, 
and  from  these  there  should  be  no  variation.  These 
fundamental  principles  are: 

(a)  Grade  A  milk,  in  a  general  way,  is  milk  which  com- 

plies with  requirements  of  such  character  and 
degree  that,  for  all  practical  purposes,  no  real 
advantage  would  be  gained  by  further  and  higher 
requirements.  The  standards  for  this  grade 
should,  therefore,  be  placed  high  enough  to  attain 
this  end,  but  not  so  high  as  to  limit  too  greatly 
the  supply,  or,  through  unduly  raising  the  price 
to  the  consumer,  to  limit  too  greatly  the  demand. 

(b)  Grade  B  milk  is  all  the  remaining  milk  of  the  com- 

munity which  is  suitable  for  drinking  purposes, 
after  pasteurization,  but  which  does  not  comply 
with  the  high  requirements  for  Grade  A  milk, 
(c)  Grade  C  milk  is  milk  which  falls  below  the  mini- 
mum requirements  for  milk  suitable  for  drink- 
ing purposes,  even  after  pasteurization.  Its  use 
must  be  confined  to  cooking  and  manufacturing 
purposes.  Recognition  of  this  grade  of  milk  is 
not  recommended  by  this  Commission  except  in 
communities  in  which  such  recognition  is  an 
economic  necessity. 

(G)   The  fundamental  objects  in  grading  milk  are: 

(a)  To  aid  in  making  safe,  for  human  consumption,  all 

milk  which  can  legally  be  sold  for  drinking 
purposes. 

(b)  To  distinguish  between  classes  of  milk  which,  while 

all  aafe,  are  of  different  degrees  of  excellence  in 
respect  to  cleanliness  and  care  in  handling. 

Each  community  should,  therefore,  endeavor  to  grade  its  milk 
supply  so  as  best  to  attain  these  objects,  without  departure  from 
the  broad  principles  above  laid  down. 


735 

(5)  CREAM 

Cream  should  be  classified  in  the  same  grades  as  milk  in  accord- 
ance with  the  requirements  for  the  grades  of  milk,  excepting  the 
bacterial  standards  which,  in  eighteen  per  cent  cream,  shall  not 
exceed  five  times  the  bacterial  standard  allowed  in  the  same  grade 
of  milk. 

Cream  containing  other  percentages  of  fat  shall  be  allowed  a 
modification  of  this  required  bacterial  standard  in  proportion  to 
the  change  in  fat. 

(6)  BUTTER 

There  is  evidence  that  much  of  the  butter  offered  for  sale  on  city 
markets  is  produced  from  cream  of  an  inferior  grade.  The  source 
of  such  cream  is  in  many  instances  farms  where  dairying  is  only 
incidental  and  there  are  no  facilities  for  sanitary  care  or  refrigera- 
tion. The  centralizers  where  this  cream  is  gathered,  and  the  plants 
where  it  is  manufactured,  into  butter  are  often  in  a  most  unsani- 
tary condition.  It  is  believed  that  sanitation  in  the  production  and 
handling  of  fluid  milk  is  far  in  advance  of  sanitation  in  the  butter 
industry.  It  is  the  opinion  of  the  Commission  that  steps  should 
be  taken  at  once  to  bring  about  a  reform  in  the  production  and 
handling  of  butter,  and  that  this  can  best  be  done  by  the  establish- 
ment of  standards  and  grades  which  will  distinguish  between  the 
superior  and  inferior  product.  The  Commission  has  deliberated 
on  the  subject  of  butter  for  a  period  of  three  years,  and  has  made 
a  detailed  study  through  several  of  its  standing  committees,  in  ad- 
dition to  conferences  with  leading  representatives  of  the  industry 
itself.  The  conclusion  of  the  Commission  on  this  subject  is  as 
follows: 

Definition 

Standard  butter  is  the  clean,  non-rancid  product  made  by 
gathering,  in  any  manner,  the  fat  of  fresh  or  ripened  cream  or 
milk  into  a  mass,  which  also  contains  a  small  portion  of  other 
milk  constituents,  with  or  without  salt,  or  added  harmless 
coloring  matter,  and  contains  not  less  than  eighty-two  per 
cent,  of  milk  fat. 

Butter  should  be  graded  as  to  its  sanitary  quality  and 
market  score,  and  this  Commission  recommends  such  methods 


736 

as  were  recently  adopted  by  law  in  Minnesota  and  Iowa, 
whereby  the  grading  of  butter  on  such  a  basis  will  be  started 
as  a  voluntary  matter. 

In  the  interest  of  public  health,  cream  used  in  the  manu- 
facture of  butter  should  be  pasteurized  before  being  used. 

Grade  A  butter  should  be  made  from  Grade  A  milk  or 
cream. 

Grade  B  butter  should  be  made  from  Grade  B  milk  or 
cream. 

The  sale  of  butter  should  be  restricted  to  the  product  ob- 
tained from  milk  or  cream  that  has  been  produced  in  such  a 
manner  that  it  could  be  sold  when  fresh  as  Grade  A  or  Grade 
B  milk  or  cream,  as  defined  by  this  Commission.  Such  milk 
or  cream  shall  be  handled  before  manufacture  under  strictly 
sanitary  conditions  by  persons  free  from  communicable  dis- 
easa 

If  the  sale  of  butter  that  is  made  from  an  inferior  grade 
of  milk  or  cream  is  permitted,  such  milk  or  cream  should  in 
all  cases  be  pasteurized,  and  the  butter  properly  labeled. 

If  butter  is  manufactured  from  rectified  milk  or  cream,  the 
fact  shall  be  so  stated  on  the  label,  and  such  butter  should  be 
considered  as  of  the  same  class  as  renovated  butter.  Such 
butter  shall  be  classified  as  Grade  C. 

All  containers  in  which  butter  is  sold  shall  be  marked  with 
the  grade  of  the  poorest  milk  or  cream  that  is  used,  with  the 
name  and  location  of  the  plant  at  which  it  is  manufactured, 
and  with  the  date  of  manufacture. 

(7)  ICE  CREAM 

The  Commission  has  had  the  subject  of  ice  cream  under  consid- 
eration for  three  years.  It  has  been  in  the  hands  of  a  special 
committee. 

In  1914  several  series  of  bacteriological  examinations  of  ice 
cream  were  carried  out  by  the  bacteriologists  of  the  Commission, 
all  of  whom  handed  in  reports  to  the  Commission  showing  the 
character  of  ice  cream  from  samples  taken  in  their  own  localities. 
There  was  also  made  available  for  the  Commission  special  work 
done  on  this  subject  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  at  Wash- 
ington, and  by  a  number  of  public  health  authorities. 


737 

The  Commission  voted  that  ice  cream  shall  he  regarded  as  a  food 
rather  than  a  confection  in  the  sense  of  the  pure  food  law.  The 
Commission  also  voted  that  the  milk  and  cream  used  in  the  manu- 
facture of  ice  cream  should  conform  to  the  standards  recommended 
by  the  Commission  for  rnilk  and  cream;  also,  that  all  milk  ami 
cream  used  in  the  manufacture  of  ice  cream  he  pasteurized. 

Concerning  the  definition  of  ice  cream,  which  was  discussed  at 
several  meetings,  the  Commission  decided  upon  the  following : 

Ice  cream  is  a  frozen  product  made  from  pasteurized  cream 
and  sugar,  or  pasteurized  cream  and  pasteurized  milk  and 
sugar,  and  shall  contain  not  less  than  eight  per  cent,  milk  fat. 
It  shall  not  contain  any  preservatives,  neutralizing  agent, 
saccharine,  renovated  or  process  butter,  fats,  or  oils  foreign  to 
milk  or  to  other  ingredients  allowed.  It  may  contain  whole- 
some eggs,  harmless  coloring  matter,  flavouring,  sound,  clean, 
mature  fruits  and  nuts,  pastries,  and  approved  thickening  not 
to  exceed  0.5  per  cent. 

Ice  cream  should  be  kept  frozen  until  dispensed.  Synthetic 
cream,  (the  product  made  by  emulsifying  homogenized  butter  with 
milk  or  skim  milk),  should  not  be  recognized  for  ice  cream  or  other 
cream  purposes  unless  the  methods  and  ingredients  used  be  ap- 
proved by  the  proper  authorities. 

Health  officers  are  advised  to  allow  nothing  to  be  sold  under 
the  name  of  ice  cream  unless  it  comes  under  the  above  definition, 
with  the  further  provision  that  it  be  manufactured  and  handled 
in  a  sanitary  manner,  the  method  of  determining  proper  sanita- 
tion to  be  controlled  by  local  officials. 

Where  there  are  no  bacterial  standards  the  bacterial  content 
should  be  used  as  a  guide  in  checking  sanitary  conditions. 

The  use  of  substitutes  for  cream,  such  as  emulsified  fats,  other 
than  milk  fats,  should  not  be  allowed  for  ice  cream  or  other  cream 
purposes.  If  used,  the  finished  product  should  not  be  labelled  ice 
cream. 

Grading 

Concerning  the  character  of  the  products  used  in  ice  cream,  the 
Commission  decided  to  recommend  that  milk  products  used  in  the 
24 


738 

manufacture  of  ice  cream  be  restricted  to  the  products  of  the  Grade 
A  and  Grade  B  classes. 

Grade  A  ice  cream  should  be  made  from  Grade  A  milk  or  cream, 
and  the  finished  product  should  contain  not  more  than  100,000 
bacteria  per  cubic  centimeter. 

Grade  B  ice  cream  should  be  made  from  milk  or  cream  not 
lower  than  Grade  B,  and  the  finished  product  should  contain  not 
more  than  1,000,000  bacteria  per  cubic  centimeter. 

The  Commission  recommends  the  use  of  a  suitable  score  card  in 
grading  the  sanitary  condition  of  ice  cream  factories. 

A  suggested  score  card  is  included  in  the  appendix  of  this  report. 

(8)  CONDENSED  MILK 

The  Commission  recognizes  that  in  the  manufacture  of  con- 
densed milk,  evaporated,  powdered,  and  condensed  milk  products, 
the  sanitary  character  of  the  raw  milk  used  affects  not  only  the 
keeping  qualities,  but  also  the  safety  and  decency  of  the  finished 
product.  It  is  clearly  to  the  best  interests  of  the  public  and  the 
condensed  milk  industry  that  condensed  milk  should  be  so  labeled 
that  the  product  prepared  from  fluid  milk  of  a  good  quality  may 
be  distinguished  from  that  prepared  from  inferior  milk. 

The  Commission  therefore  recommends  the  passage  of  Federal, 
State  and  municipal  legislation  which  will  permit  the  manufac- 
turer to  state  upon  the  label  that  his  product  has  been  prepared 
Grade  A  milk,  and  he  shall  be  protected  in  the  use  of  such  a 


(9)  SKIM  MILK 

The  Commission  passed  a  resolution  regarding  the  chemical 
standards  for  skim  milk  at  one  of  its  earliest  sessions,  recommend- 
ing that  skim  milk  should  contain  not  less  than  8.5  per  cent,  of 
milk  solids  not  fat. 

In  addition  to  this,  regarding  the  food  value  of  skim  milk  the 
Commission  recommends  that  : 

Whereas,  the  pressure  of  the  cost  of  living  is  increasing 
rapidly,  and  vast  quantities  of  nutritious  and  available  food 
are  now  going  to  waste,  and  laws  prohibiting  the  sale  of  skim 
milk  have  no  public  health  significance;  therefore,  the  Com- 


739 

mission  recommends  that  the  use  of  skim  milk  as  a  food  be 
approved,  and  urges  the  repeal  of  laws  wherever  they  exist 
that  prohibit  the  sale  of  skim  milk  as  a  food. 

(10)  BUTTEEMLLK 

Concerning  buttermilk,  the  Commission  considered  the  subject 
at  three  of  its  sessions.  As  a  definition  of  buttermilk  the  Com- 
mission suggests: 

That  the  sale  of-  buttermilk  should  be  restricted,  first,  to 
the  product  resulting  from  the  churning  of  milk  or  cream 
that  is  produced  under  such  conditions  that  when  fresh  it 
could  be  sold  as  Grade  A  or  Grade  B  milk  or  cream,  as  such 
grades  have  been  defined  by  this  Commission;  or,  second,  to 
the  product  resulting  from  the  skimming,  souring,  or  treat- 
ment in  any  way  of  Grade  A  or  Grade  B  milk,  so  that  it  re- 
sembles buttermilk,  (the  true  character  of  such  imitation  or 
artificial  buttermilk  to  be  distinctly  stated  on  the  container 
in  every  case),  provided  that  all  such  buttermilk  shall  be 
handled  during  and  after  manufacture  in  a  sanitary  manner 
approved  by  the  local  health  authorities,  and  that  it  shall  be 
kept  at  a  temperature  below  fifty  degrees  F.  from  the  time  of 
manufacture  until  delivered  to  the  consumer. 

The  Commission  recommends  that  all  milk,  cream  or  skim  milk 
entering  into  the  manufacture  of  buttermilk  be  pasteurized,  unless 
it  can  be  shown  that  such  milk  or  cream  corresponds  to  Grade  A 
milk. 

All  buttermilk  should  be  sold  in  bottles  or  cans  that  are  properly 
sealed  and  labeled,  with  the  name  of  the  manufacturing  plant, 
with  either  the  day  or  date  of  manufacture,  with  the  grade  of 
milk  from  which  it  was  manufactured,  and  with  a  statement  as  to 
whether  it  is  manufactured  from  a  raw  or  pasteurized  product, 
and  whether  it  is  artificially  or  naturally  prepared. 

(11)  CLARIFICATION 

The  process  of  the  clarification  of  milk  has  come  into  such  wide 
use  that  the  Commission  has  felt  it  necessary  to  take  cognizance 
of  it,  but  it  does  not  believe  that  it  should  be  recommended  as  a 
required  standard  method.  In  its  favor  are  the  following  points : 


na 

(a)  It  removes  visible  dirt 

(b)  It  removes  inflammatory  products,  including  many  of  the 

causative  germs. 
(e)  It  performs  die  work  of  the  strainer,  but  in  a  much  more 


it  are  die  following  points : 

(a)  It  removes  risible  dirt,  but  not  all  disease  producing 

grams  and  hence  misleads  the  consumer  as  to  the  real 
purity  of  die  milk. 

(b)  It  doe*  not  remove  urine  or  die  soluble  portion  of  feces; 

nevertheless,  the  milk  appears  clean. 

(e)  It  adds  another  process  requiring  handling  of  the  milk, 
die  situation. 


(d)  It  largely  destroys  the  value  of  the  dirt  test,  thoujdi  not 

more  so  than  good  -training. 

(e)  It  breaks  up  clumps  of  bacteria  and  distributes  them 

through  the  milk. 

(f)  The  exact  nature  of  the  material  removed  is  not  yet  fully 

understood. 


Concerning  the  subject  of  homogenized  milk  or  cream,  the  Com- 
mission  bases  its  attitude  on  the  principle  of  correct  labeling.  It  i- 
of  die  opinion  diat  in  the  compounding  of  milk  or  cream,  no  fat 
other  than  milk  fat  from  the  milk  in  process  should  be  used,  and 
that  no  substance  foreign  to  milk  should  be  added  to  it. 

The  use  of  condensed  milk  or  other  materials  for  the  thickening 
of  cream  u  opposed  unless  the  facts  are  clearly  set  forth  on  the 
label  of  the  retail  package. 

Homogenized  milk  or  cream  should  be  marked  as  such,  sta 
die  percentage  of  fat  it  contains, 


A  milk  dealer  should  be  required  to  have  a  permit  or  lieerr- 
0e!l  any  grade  or  class  of  milk,  and  to  nse  a  label  for  su<:ii  '/ra<J<- 
or  claa&    8u/»h  permit  or  li'-<  -Id  be  granted  only  after  the 

local  health  board  ha*  determined  that  th*  milk  of  t}^-  'i^l^r  actu- 


741 

ally  belongs  to  the  grade,  and  it  should  be  revoked  and  the  use  of 
the  label  forbidden  when  it  is  determined  that  the  milk  is  not  in  the 
grade  or  class  designated. 


LABELLING 

All  milk  should  be  labeled  and  marked  with  the  grade  in  which 
it  is  to  be  sold.  In  dating  milk,  uniform  methods  should  be 

^  7 

adopted.  Besides  the  letter  of  the  grade  and  the  words  "  raw  " 
or  "  pasteurized."'  there  should  be  added  sufficient  statements  u> 
identify  the  milk  as  to  its  source,  and  the  time  at  which  it  was 
produced,  bottled,  or  pasteurized  :  and  no  term  descriptive  of  the 
quality  of  the  milk  other  than  the  officially  adopted  grades  should 
be  authorized,  unless  such  term  is  of  a  generally  accepted  meaning. 

In  dating  milk,  uniform  methods  should  be  adopted  for  all 
grades  of  both  raw  milk  and  pasteurized  milk,  using  the  day  of 
the  week  or  the  day  of  the  month. 

The  sale  of  milk  which  is  nuslabeled  or  misbranded  should  be 
punished  by  revoking  the  dealer's  license,  reducing  it  to  a  lower 
grade,  or  by  fines,  or  suitable  penalties. 


742 


APPENDIX 

HISTORY  OF  THE  NATIONAL  COMMISSION  ON  MILK  STANDARDS 

Milk  Grading  Previous  to  the  Commission's  Organization 

In  1907  there  was  held  a  milk  conference  in  Washington  called 
by  the  Commissioners  of  the  District  of  Columbia  to  report  upon 
the  milk  supply  of  that  city.  At  this  conference  Dr.  A.  D.  Melvin 
offered  a  resolution  proposing  that  milk  be  classified  into  three 
classes : 

Class  1.  Certified  Milk 
Class  2.  Inspected  Milk 
Class  3.  Pasteurized  Milk 

In  the  first  two  classes  the  cows  were  to  be  tuberculin  tested,  and 
the  milk  to  have  bacterial  standards.  The  conference  recom- 
mended this  classification.  The  proposal  was  notable  because  it 
provided  for  the  pasteurization  of  all  milk,  with  the  exception  of 
milk  from  tuberculin  tested  cows,  produced  under  sanitary  condi- 
tions. 

In  1908,  the  Board  of  Health  of  New  York  city  adopted  a 
classification  of  milk  as  follows: 

Class  1.  Milk  (ordinary  market  milk, 

raw  or  pasteurized). 
Class  2.   Selected  Milk 
Class  3.  Inspected  Milk 
Class  4.  Guaranteed  Milk 
Class  5.   Certified  Milk 

Class  1  represented  the  bulk  of  the  supply,  and  no  provision 
was  made  requiring  either  pasteurization  or  a  bacterial  standard. 

Organization  of  the  Commission  on  Milk  Standards 

In  1910,  December  2  and  3,  the  New  York  Milk  Committee 
held  a  conference  on  milk  problems  of  leading  milk  authorities 
in  America,  at  which  the  following  resolution  was  adopted : 

Resolved,  That  pending  the  adoption  of  national  standards 
the  conference  on  milk  problems  of  the  New  York  Milk  Com- 
mittee endorse  the  classification  of  milk  recommended  by  A. 


743 

D.  Melvin,  Chief  of  the  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  of  the 
United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  approved  by  the 
milk  conference  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  1907,  and  pub- 
lished in  Circular  114  of  the  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry, 
and  in  Bulletins  Nos.  41  and  56  of  the  United  States  Public 
Health  and  Marine  Hospital  Service. 

(This  classification  designates  three  kinds  of  milk:  Certified, 
Inspected,  Pasteurized.) 

This  same  conference  also  passed  the  following  resolution : 

Whereas,  It  has  been  demonstrated  by  the  papers  and  the 
discussions  at  this  conference  held  at  the  invitation  of  the 
New  York  Milk  Committee  that  it  is  imperative  that  definite 
standards  and  regulations  should  be  adopted  to  govern  the 
production  and  handling  of  dairy  products  for  the  prevention 
of  disease  and  the  saving  of  lives ; 

Resolved,  That  the  New  York  Milk  Committee  be  re- 
quested to  invite  between  twelve  and  twenty  recognized  ex- 
perts on  milk  problems  to  meet  in  conference,  and  that  those 
experts  be  asked  to  make  a  unanimous  report,  recommending 
proper  milk  standards  on  which  Congress  or  State  authorities 
may  formulate  milk  legislation. 

In  accordance  with  this  resolution,  in  March,  1911,  the  New 
York  Milk  Committee,  which  is  a  voluntary  organization  working 
for  the  improvement  of  the  milk  supply  of  New  York  city  and  the 
reduction  of  infant  mortality,  invited  twenty  experts  to  become 
members  of  a  Commission  on  Milk  Standards.  These  men  were 
selected  from  a  list  of  more  than  two  hundred  men  of  prominence 
in  medicine,  sanitation,  public  health,  and  laboratory  work,  who 
were  recognized  as  authorities  on  the  milk  question. 

The  members  at  the  present  time  are  as  follows: 

Dr.  Carl  L.  Alsberg,  Chief,  Bureau  of  Chemistry,  United 
States  Department  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Dr.  John  F.  Anderson,  of  E.  E.  Squibb  &  Sons,  New 
Brunswick,  N.  J. 

Dr.  B.  L.  Arms,  State  Bacteriologist,  Montgomery,  Ala. 

Prof.  H.  W.  Conn,  Director  of  Laboratory  of  State  Board 
of  Health,  Middletown,  Conn. 


Dr.  W.  A.  Evans,  Department  of  Preventive  Medicine, 
Northwestern,  University,  Chicago,  Illinois. 

Dr.  Charles  J.  Hastings,  Medical  Officer  of  Health,  Tor- 
onto, Canada. 

Dr.  J.  N.  Hurty,  Secretary,  State  Board  of  Health, 
Indianapolis,  Indiana. 

Dr.  J.  H.  Landis,  Health  Officer,  Cincinnati,  Ohio. 

Dr.  E.  C.  Levy,  Health  Officer,  Eichmond,  Va. 

Dr.  A.  D.  Melvin,  Chief,  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry, 
United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Dr.  J.  S.  Neff,  Narberth,  Pa. 

Dr.  Charles  E.  North,  30  Church  street,  New  York  city. 

Dr.  William  H.  Park,  Director  of  Laboratories,  Depart- 
ment of  Health,  New  York  city. 

Mr.  R  A.  Pearson,  President,  College  of  Agriculture, 
Ames,  Iowa. 

Dr.  M.  P.  Ravenel,  Department  of  Preventive  Medicine, 
University  of  Missouri,  Columbia,  Mo. 

Prof.  M.  J.  Eosenau,  Department  of  Preventive  Medicine 
and  Hygiene,  Harvard  University,  Cambridge,  Mass. 

Prof.  H.  C.  Sherman,  Department  of  Chemistry,  Colum- 
bia University,  New  York  city. 

Dr.  L.  L.  Van  Slyke,  Agricultural  Experiment  Station, 
Geneva,  N.  Y. 

Mr.  C.  H.  Wells,  Health  Officer,  Montclair,  N.  J. 

Dr.  William  C.  Woodward,  Health  Officer,  Washington, 
D.  C. 

In  the  list  of  names  above  there  are  eight  public  health  officers. 
seven  bacteriologists,  three  chemists  and  two  agricultural  experts. 
Thirteen  out  of  the  number  have  been  educated  as  physicians ;  two 
of  the  members  have  had  long  practical  experience  in  the  milk  in- 
dustry; six  have  been  connected  with  the  production  and  control 
of  certified  milk. 

Purposes 

While  this  Commission  was  created  by,  and  its  expense  is  borne 
by  the  New  York  Milk  Committee,  it  has  not  been  the  intention 
of  the  Committee  that  the  Commission  should  have  the  New  York 


h 


745 

city  milk  problem  solely  in  mind.  It  was  desired  that  the  Com- 
mission should  make  recommendations  regarding  milk  standards 
and  legislation  that  might  be  adopted  by  any  city  or  town  in  the 
United  States  or  Canada. 

Meetings 

The  first  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  at  the  New  York 
Academy  of  Medicine  on  May  22,  1911.  The  subjects  discussed 
included  bacterial  standards,  chemical  standards,  and  the  grading 
and  classification  of  milk.  Several  committees  were  appointed  to 
report  at  the  next  meeting. 

The  second  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  at  the  New 
York  Academy  of  Medicine,  October  5  and  6,  1911,  at  which  the 
reports  of  standing  committees  were  received  and  resolutions 
adopted  concerning  bacterial  standards,  chemical  standards,  and 
grades  and  classes  of  milk.  Special  committees  were  appointed 
to  consider  certain  specific  matters.  The  Commission  tentatively 
recommended  that  milk  should  be  classified  as  follows:  Certified ; 
Inspected;  Market;  Cooking;  that  there  be  bacterial  standards 
and  that  the  last  two  classes  should  be  pasteurized. 

January  4,  1912,  the  New  York  City  Department  of  Health 
made  an  amendment  to  its  sanitary  code  providing  for  a  new  classi- 
fication of  milk,  as  follows : 

Grade  A,  for  infants  and  children,  including :  Certified ; 
guaranteed;  inspected  (raw);  selected  (pasteur- 
ized). 

Grade  B,  for  adults,  including:  Selected  (raw)  ;  pasteurized. 
Grade  C,  for  cooking,  including  both  raw  and  pasteurized. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  this  grading  system  made  some  use  of  the 
recommendations  of  the  Commission  on  Milk  Standards,  but 
omitted  any  bacterial  standards  for  Grade  E  or  Grade  C  milk, 
and  permitted  the  sale  of  raw,  unpasteurized  milk  in  all  grades. 
At  the  same  time  it  was  recognized  that  this  action  of  New  York 
city  was  a  great  step  in  advance,  and  an  indication  that  the  Com- 
mission's work  gave  promise  of  taking  practical  form. 


746 

First  Report 

The  third  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  at  Homer,  New 
York,  January  25,  and  at  the  New  York  Academy  of  Medicine, 
January  26  and  27,  1912.  At  this  meeting  minor  matters  were 
voted  upon  and  preparation  made  for  the  publication  of  a  report 
of  all  of  the  Commission's  work.  The  first  report  appeared  as  a 
bulletin  of  the  United  States  Public  Health  Service  in  the  Public 
Health  Reports,  Volume  27,  No.  19,  May  10,  1912;  70,000 
copies  of  this  report  were  distributed. 

The  fourth  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  in  Chicago, 
October  29  and  30,  1912,  at  the  time  of  the  National  Dairy  Show. 
At  this  meeting  the  Commission  attended  the  annual  convention 
of  the  International  Milk  Dealers'  Association,  and  took  part  in 
a  discussion  of  the  classification  of  milk  and  milk  standards  with 
the  leading  representatives  of  the  milk  industry  of  the  United 
States  and  Canada. 

The  fifth  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  in  Richmond, 
Virginia,  on  May  2  and  3,  1913.  By  this  time  the  Commission 
had  the  benefit  of  numerous  criticisms  and  suggestions  which  had 
been  called  forth  by  the  first  provisional  report.  At  this  meeting 
the  Commission  made  some  radical  modifications  of  its  standards 
and  grades,  as  follows : 

(1)  That  in  classifying  milk  the  grades  be  designated  by 

letters  only,  and  not  by  such  words  as  "  certified," 
"  inspected,"  "  selected,"  etc. 

(2)  That  the  classification  be  changed  to  include  only  three 

grades : 

Grade  A,  consisting  of  two  classes,  raw  milk  with  a 
bacterial  standard  of  100,000  per  cr.  from  tuberculin 
tested  cows  (employees  medically  inspected) ;  pas- 
teurized milk  with  a  bacterial  standard  of  100,000  per 
cc  before  pasteurization,  and  10,000  per  cc.  after 
pasteurization ; 

Grade  B,  consisting  of  one  class,  with  a  bacterial  standard 
of  1,000,000  before  pasteurization   and   50,000   after 
pasteurization. 


747 

Grade  C,  consisting  of  one  class,  over  1,000,000  before 
pasteurization,  and  50,000  after  pasteurization. 

Second  Report 

The  second  report  of  the  Commission  on  Milk  Standards  was 
published  by  the  United  States  Public  Health  Service  in  their 
public  health  reports  on  August  22,  1913,  and  contained  the  new 
grading  system  as  above  recommended.  This  report  was  endorsed 
by  the  American  Public  Health  Association  at  its  annual  meeting 
in  Colorado  Springs,  September  9-13,  1913. 

(January  1,  1914,  the  New  York  City  Department  of  Health 
amended  their  grading  system  so  as  to  conform  in  its  essential 
features  to  the  new  grading  system  recommended  by  the  Commis- 
sion on  Milk  Standards.  This  was  soon  followed  by  action  by 
the  New  York  State  Department  of  Health  in  establishing  a  grad- 
ing system  for  all  towns  and  cities  in  the  State.  Later  on  the  cities 
of  Newark,  N.  J.,  Jersey  City,  N.  J.,  Richmond,  Va.,  Kansas 
City,  Mo.,  adopted  similar  though  not  identical  grading  systems. 
The  grading  of  milk  is  also  being  considered  at  the  present  time 
by  the  public  health  authorities  of  several  other  municipalities  as 
well  as  States.) 

The  sixth  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  at  the  New  York 
Academy  of  Medicine  April  13,  1914.  At  this  time  special  at- 
tention was  given  to  milk  products  and  reports  presented  by  the 
members  of  their  own  investigations  on  the  sanitary  and  bacterial 
conditions  of  the  ice  cream  and  butter  in  various  parts  of  the 
United  States  and  Canada. 

The  seventh  meeting  of  the  Commission  was  held  in  the  Hotel 
Biltmore  and  the  New  York  Academy  of  Medicine  May  7  and  8, 
1915.  On  this  occasion  the  Commission  met  the  officers  of  a  num- 
ber of  commercial  organizations,  including  the  National  Ice  Cream 
Dealers'  Association,  the  National  Creamery  and  Butter  Makers' 
Association,  and  the  International  Milk  Dealers'  Association. 
The  deliberations  dealt  chiefly  with  the  subjects  of  butter,  ice 
cream  and  other  milk  products,  and  also  with  the  questions  of 
the  control  of  certified  milk  and  dairy  inspection. 

A  special  committee  of  the  Commission  met  in  Washington  on 
January  17,  1916,  with  the  Joint  Committee  on  Definitions  and 


748 

Standards  appointed  by  the  Bureau  of  Chemistry  of  the  United 
States  Department  of  Agriculture.  The  object  of  this  meeting 
was  to  permit  the  members  of  the  Commission  on  Milk  Standards 
to  present  to  the  Joint  Committee  the  results  of  the  work  of  the 
Commission  on  Milk  Standards,  and  to  urge  the  Joint  Committee 
on  Definitions  and  Standards,  which  represents  the  food  and 
dairy  commissioners  of  the  various  States,  the  agricultural  chem- 
ists, and  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture,  to  approve 
of  the  adoption  of  uniform  milk  standards  for  all  of  the  States,  and 
of  the  bacterial  testing  and  grading  of  milk  according  to  its 
sanitary  character. 

The  eighth  meeting  was  held  May  19  and  20,  1916,  in  the  New 
York  Academy  of  Medicine.  This  meeting  was  especially  effective 
because  of  the  extensive  work  performed  by  the  standing  com- 
mittees of  the  Commission  which  held  their  own  independent  meet- 
ings in  various  parts  of  the  United  States  several  weeks  in  advance 
of  the  general  meeting.  As  a  consequence  of  this  preparatory 
work,  each  committee  brought  in  most  complete  and  extensive 
reports  of  the  subjects  with  which  they  had  to  deal.  These  sub- 
jects included:  ice  cream,  butter,  condensed  milk,  standards  for 
small  communities,  the  significance  of  bacterial  counts,  essentials 
of  dairy  scoring,  adjusted  milk,  clarification,  pasteurization, 
tuberculin  testing  and  other  minor  matters.  This  present  report 
is  a  summary  of  the  conclusions  reached  by  the  Commission  as  a 
result  of  all  of  the  sessions,  and  may  be  regarded  as  superseding 
the  previous  reports. 

FACTORS  OF  PRIMARY  IMPORTANCE  IN  DAIRY  PRACTICE  FOR 
CONTROLLING  THE  SANITARY  CHARACTER  OF  MILK 

In  its  last  report  the  Commission  placed  in  an  appendix  detailed 
regulations  for  the  control  of  sanitary  conditions  in  dairies  and 
milk  receiving  stations. 

The  regulations  given  there  have  varying  degrees  of  value  in 
controlling  the  character  of  milk.  Many  add  expense  to  the  cost 
of  production,  and  some,  while  they  improve  external  appearances 
in  the  dairy,  do  not  materially  affect  the  quality  of  milk.  The 
grading  system  deals  primarily  with  the  character  of  the  product 


749 

and  a  dairyman  should  give  his  special  attention  to  such  factors 
as  will  most  effectively  improve  the  character  of  the  product. 

Hence  dairy  inspectors  should  aim  to  place  primary  emphasis 
upon  the  factors  that  most  largely  affect  the  quality  of  the  milk. 
The  Commission  urges  all  health  officers  and  dairymen  to  separate 
the  factors  of  primary  importance  from  those  of  secondary  im- 
portance. The  following  statements  are  not  intended  to  replace 
more  elaborate  regulations  given  elsewhere  but  to  show  where  the 
primary  emphasis  should  be  laid  and  to  distinguish  the  more  im- 
portant measures  from  those  that  are  of  secondary  importance  in 
controlling  the  quality. 

In  what  follows  it  is  assumed  that  other  standard  regulations 
are  adopted,  and  that  no  milk  is  to  be  shipped  from  cows  evidently 
diseased,  or  with  sore  udders,  or  milk  handled  by  employees  sick 
with  any  infectious  disease,  or  carriers  of  disease  germs. 

Where  milk  is  to  be  sold  in  a  raw  state  it  is  assumed  that  all 
cows  will  be  under  veterinary  supervision,  and  tuberculin  tested 
once  each  year,  and  dairy  employees  will  be  under  regular  medical 
inspection. 

Under  these  conditions  it  is  the  opinion  of  the  Commission  that 
the  following  factors  are  most  essential  in  putting  on  the  market 
milk  which  is  clean  and  contains  a  low  bacterial  count. 

1.     Financial  Stimulus 

This  factor  underlies  all  others.  Unless  the  dairyman  can  be 
convinced  that  it  is  to  his  financial  advantage  to  produce  clean 
milk,  any  attempt  to  purify  the  milk  supply  by  legal  statutes  will 
be  largely  futile.  To  produce  such  a  financial  stimulus  some  form 
of  grading  milk  is  necessary  in  which  the  public  will  have  confi- 
dence as  being  thoroughly  reliable.  This  will  involve: 

(a)     The  Health  Officer 

The  milk  must  be  graded  by  the  proper  authorities,  and  this 
should  include  constant  bacteriological  examination  of  the  milk 
furnished  by  each  producer  for  the  purpose  of  grading. 

(fc)     The  Dealer 

The  milk  should  be  paid  for  by  the  dealer  according  to  its  grade. 
The  most  effective  results  will  be  obtained  so  far  as  concerns  clean- 


750 

liness,  and  sanitary  character,  when  the  dealers  pay  the  producer 
for  milk  on  a  scale  based  upon  its  bacterial  count,  in  addition  to 
other  factors. 

The  dealer  should  also  thoroughly  sterilize  all  milk  containers 
by  steam  before  returning  them  for  refilling.     (It  has  been  found 
that  one  of  the  greatest  sources  of  trouble  is  the  fact  that  the  dealer 
returns  to  the  producer  cans  which  are  not  only  not  sterilized,  but 
sometimes  not  even  washed  clean.     ~No  producer  can  furnish  good 
milk  in  such  cans,  but  the  dairyman  is  almost  sure  to  be  blamed 
for  a  condition  for  which  the  dealer  is  wholly  responsible.) 
2.     To  produce  milk  of  Grade  A  or  B  the  producer  will  find  the 
following  factors  the  most  efficient  in  controlling  its  clean- 
liness and  its  bacterial  count : 

(a)     Milking 

Cows  should  have  clean  udders. 

Hands  of  the  milker  should  be  clean  and  dry. 

A  small  topped  milk  pail  should  be  used. 

With  clean  methods  no  strainer  is  needed,  but  if  one  is 
used  it  is  preferably  of  cloth  (cheese  cloth)  which  has 
been  sterilized  by  boiling.  It  is  important  that  the 
same  cloth  shall  not  be  used  for  the  morning's  milking 
and  again  for  the  night's  milking.  Two  strainer 
cloths  should  be  boiled,  one  used  for  the  morning  and 
the  other  for  the  night's  milking. 

(6)     Sterilizing 

All  milk  vessels  should  be  washed  with  a  brush  and  with 
washing  soda,  or  with  alkaline  powder  and  water, 
should  be  rinsed  in  clean  water  and  sterilized.  Where 
steam  is  available,  this  should  be  used  for  sterilizing, 
either  is  a  jet  of  live  steam,  or  under  pressure.  Where 
steam  is  not  available  an  abundance  of  boiling  water 
should  be  used. 

(c)     Cooling 

The  milk  shall  be  cooled  promptly  to  as  low  a  tempera- 
ture as  is  feasible  with  facilities  available.  Where 
this  is  done  in  a  water  tank  and  it  is  desired  to  stir 


751 

the  rnilk  to  facilitate  the  process,  a  wooden  paddle  of 
any  kind  must  not  be  used.  A  metal  stirrer  may  be 
used,  which  must  be  thoroughly  washed  and  sterilized 
with  boiling  water  each  day.  The  lower  the  tempera- 
ture to  which  the  milk  can  be  cooled,  the  easier  it  will 
be  to  produce  milk  of  low  bacterial  count. 

While  other  factors  in  milk  production  have  their  influence, 
extended  tests  show  that  90  per  cent  of  the  high  bacterial  counts 
are  attributable  to  the  neglect  of  the  above. 

The  above  sanitary  measures  have  special  reference  to  the  pre- 
servation of  the  sanitary  character  of  milk  during  the  process  of 
milk  production  on  the  dairy  farm.  It  is  recognized  that  in  addi- 
tion to  these,  precautions  must  be  observed  in  the  milk  factory  or 
shipping  station,  and  on  the  railroad  and  in  the  city  delivery  sta- 
tion. In  some  cases  the  chief  trouble  is  after  the  milk  has  left  the 
dairy.  In  shipment  three  factors  control  the  quality  of  the  milk 
at  its  destination :  Time,  temperature,  and  cleanliness  of  utensils. 
Thorough  refrigeration  of  milk  in  its  progress  from  the  dairy 
farm  through  the  shipping  station,  on  the  railroad  and  in  the  city 
station,  is  essential  to  prevent  large  multiplication  of  bacteria. 
Washing  and  sterilizing  of  all  vessels  in  which  milk  is  contained, 
and  of  all  apparatus  with  which  it  comes  in  contact  is  vital  if 
contaminations  are  to  be  prevented  which  can  easily  destroy  the 
sanitary  character  of  milk  which  may  have  left  the  dairy  farm  in 
first  class  condition.  There  is  very  little  value  in  the  practice  of 
sanitary  measures  by  the  dairy  farmer  if  the  milk  in  the  hands  of 
the  dealer  is  not  properly  refrigerated  and  handled  in  a  sanitary 
manner. 


752 


SCOKK  CAKD  FOR  ICE  CREAM  MANUFACTURING  PLANTS 

Perfect    Allow 
LOCATION 15 

Above  ground 5 

Free  from   contaminating   surrounding    (No   score 

if  bad )    3 

Protected  from   street  dust 3 

Not  connected  with  any  other  room 2 

No  other  business  in  same  establishment 2 

(  ONSTRUCTION 15 

Well  lighted    (natural)    2 

Well  ventilated 1 

Thoroughly  screened 2 

Water-closet    does    not    open    directly  into  estab- 
lishment   2 

Separate  room  for  washing  utensils 2 

Floor :    Smooth,  water-tight,  well  drained 4 

Walls  and  ceiling:  Smooth  and  tight 2 

EQUIPMENT 30 

Steam  at  all  times 5 

Hot  water  at  all  times 3 

(No  credit  unless  running  hot  water) 

Sterilizer  for  utensils    3 

Connections  for  sterilizing  apparatus 2 

Pasteurizer :   Holding  machine   4 

Automatic    recording    device    1 

Refrigeration :  Mechanical.      2 

( Proper    ice-box,    1 ) 

Freezer :  Type,  connections,  etc 2 

Sanitary  piping 2 

Wash  basins  and  towels,  ample 

Utensils :   Condition    

Ample  for  the  service.  . 

Racks  for 

Employees :  Health  certificates  for 

Clean  suits  provided   

METHODS 40         .... 

Freedom   from   flies    2 

Protection  of  material: 

Before  manufacture    3 

During   manufacture    3 

After  manufacture    3 

Utensils   and   apparatus   sterilized 3 

(Washed   in  hot  water,   1) 

Cleanliness : 

Floors 3     Walls  and  ceiling 1 

Windows 1     Utensils 3 

Apparatus ....     3     Employees 3 

Character  of  materials  used: 

Milk  and  cream,  Grade  A 0 

Grade  B.  4;   Grade  C,   1 

Condensed  milk,  eggs,  etc 2 

Thickeners  —  none   used    1 

Artificial   coloring  —  none    1 

Degree  of  refrigeration  of  final  product 2 

Total.  100 


753 

BOVINE  TUBERCULOSIS  AND  OTHER  DAIRY  DISEASES 
From  time  to  time  the  work  of  this  Committee  has  touched  upon 
the  important  question  of  bovine  tuberculosis  and  contagious  abor- 
tion. So  such  study  has  been  had  and  is  being  had,  and  so  many 
efforts  have  been  made  in  relation  to  these  matters  as  to  which 
this  Committee  has  given  little  time  or  thought,  that  there  is  no 
intention  to  attempt  at  this  time  to  make  an  extensive  report  in  rela- 
tion thereto.  It  seems  to  be  conceded  that  the  continued  prosperity 
of  the  dairy  industry  in  this  State  requires  a  continued  attempt 
to  eliminate  or  keep  under  control  bovine  tuberculosis  among  the 
herds.  It  is  an  undoubted  fact  that  infection  with  bovine  tuber- 
culosis is  possible  to  mankind  and  is  all  too  frequent  in  the  case 
of  young  children  nourished  with  un-pasteurized  cow's  milk.  It 
seems  to  be  well  established  that  milk  from  tubercular  cows  under 
certain  conditions  will  spread  the  infection  to  young  animals.  It 
is  strongly  suspected  that  the  feeding  of  infected  milk  to  calves 
may  produce  a  disease  in  the  herd,  which  results  in  abortion  or 
"  contagious  abortion,"  as  it  is  frequently  termed. 

It  is  the  custom  at  the  creamery  where  only  cream  is  desired 
and  at  the  market  milk  station  during  the  period  when  cream  is 
separated  from  the  surplus  milk,  to  return  to  the  dairymen  quan- 
tities of  skim  milk  for  use  in  rearing  calves  and  other  livestock. 
Of  course,  whey  is  returned  from  cheese  factories  in  substantially 
the  same  way.  Certain  milk  purchasing  companies,  as  the  result 
of  study  and  investigation,  on  their  own  motion,  pasteurize  all 
skim  milk  thus  returned  in  order  to  prevent  the  spread  of  disease 
among  the  herds  in  the  vicinity  of  their  plants.  It  would  seem 
impossible  to  escape  from  the  conclusion  that  if  skim  milk  from 
many  herds  is  mingled  and  returned  to  the  dairies,  if  there  is  a 
cow  in  the  neighborhood  giving  infected  milk,  that  the  germs 
from  that  cow  must  necessarily  be  scattered  to  nearly  all  the 
dairies  receiving  skim  milk  from  the  station.  It  would  necessarily 
follow  that  this  infected  milk  would  in  turn  infect  growing  calves 
on  these  farms.  Is  the  State  justified  in  spending  large  sums  of 
money  to  eradicate  or  control  bovine  tuberculosis  on  the  one  hand, 
while  on  the  other  permitting  the  fatal  germs  to  be  sown,  wholesale 
from  the  collecting  station  ?  An  effort  has  been  made  in  the  past 


754 

to  secure  the  enactment  of  a  law  providing  that  all  skim  milk  and 
whey  thus  re-distributed  among  the  herds  should  be  pasteurized. 
The  passage  of  such  an  act  is  urged  by  certain  dairy  sections  which 
have  had  experience  with  the  question.  It  is  asserted  by  these 
dairying  communities  that  the  results  of  pasteurization  of  skim 
milk  are  evident  in  the  reduction  of  bovine  tuberculosis  in  their 
communities.  They  are  therefore  strongly  in  favor  of  the  passage 
of  such  a  law.  In  other  sections,  however,  such  proposed  law  is 
opposed  on  the  part  of  creameries  and  cheese  factories  on  the 
ground  that  it  will  add  greatly  to  expense  and  cost  additional 
labor.  It  is  believed,  however,  that  a  full  understanding  of  the 
question  will  remove  this  opposition.  The  necessary  apparatus 
to  accomplish  pasteurization  of  the  skim  milk  and  whey  is  really 
simple  and  inexpensive.  If  the  certain  milk  companies  can  afford 
to  do  it  without  additional  charge  for  the  protection  of  the  herds 
bringing  milk  to  their  plants,  merely  to  improve  dairying  con- 
ditions in  their  vicinity,  and  without  any  present  return,  surely 
the  dairymen  of  the  State  can  well  demand  this  safeguard  in 
order  to  protect  their  own  interests. 

It  was  perhaps  unfortunate  that  the  effort  of  the  State  to  control 
bovine  tuberculosis  met  with  unsatisfactory  results  in  its  early 
stages.  These  results  are  claimed  to  have  been  collected  by  the 
New  York  Milk  Committee  under  date  of  November  24,  1914, 
and  submitted  to  the  Legislative  Committee  of  the  Governor's 
Commission  on  bovine  tuberculosis.  This  report  is  included  here- 
inafter. It  is  stated  to  have  been  withheld  from  publication  at 
that  time.  It  is  possible  that  this  unfortunate  situation  has  con- 
fused and  discouraged  those  engaged  in  the  attempt  to  control  this 
evil.  It  is  sincerely  to  be  hoped  that  in  the  near  future  the  State 
may  be  able  to  undertake  the  work  of  eradicating  or  reducing  this 
disease  in  an  efficient  and  successful  manner.  It  should  either 
be  admitted  that  the  task  is  too  great  a  one  for  the  State  to  accom- 
plish and  further  effort  abandoned,  or  else  it  should  be  resolutely 
attacked.  If  it  is  possible  successfully  to  control  this  disease,, 
the  State  of  New  York  is  abundantly  able  to  afford  the  necessary 
funds  and  it  should  be  possible  to  secure  efficient  administration. 
If  it  can  be  controlled,  the  ultimate  return  to  the  State  and  to  the 


755 

dairymen  of  the  State  will  far  exceed  the  expense.  If  no  practical 
result  can  be  accomplished  towards  the  subjugation  of  the  disease, 
then  there  is  no  reason  why  further  money  should  be  expended 
for  that  purpose.  A  decision  upon  this  point  should  be  reached 
at  once. 

The  following  is  the  report  above  referred  to.  The  Committee 
has  made  no  independent  investigation  to  ascertain  how  far  the 
conclusions  of  the  New  York  Milk  Committee,  as  contained  in 
this  report,  are  justified  by  the  facts.  It  is  included  here  for  the 
purpose  of  showing  alleged  causes  of  dissatisfaction  that  existed 
in  the  administration  of  this  law  in  former  years.  It  is  believed 
that  the  fraudulent  practices  referred  to  in  this  report  have  been 
eliminated  by  the  Department  under  the  present  administration. 
That  fact  is  admitted  by  those  who  prepared  the  report  in  question, 
but  the  New  York  Milk  Committee  earnestly  contends  still  that 
the  State  fails  to  take  effective  means  and  measures  to  clean  up 
the  herds  of  the  State. 


NEW  YORK   MILK   COMMITTEE 


REPORT  OF  CRITICISM  OF  NEW  YORK  STATE  AGRICULTURAL  LAW 
AND  ITS  ADMINISTRATION  IN  RELATION  TO  BOVINE  TUBERCU- 
LOSIS, SUBMITTED  TO  THE  HON.  SETH  Low,,  MEMBER  OF 
GOVERNOR  GLYNN'S  COMMISSION  ON  BOVINE  TUBERCULOSIS, 
NOVEMBER  25th;  1914 


[757] 


758 

NEW  YORK  MILK  COMMITTEE 

(Incorporated  1910) 
105  EAST  22D  STEEET 


YORK,  November  25,  1914. 

Hon.  SETH  Low,  Chairman,  Legislative  Committee  of  Governor's 
Commission  on  Bovine  Tuberculosis,  Bedford  Hills,  New 
York: 

Dear  Sir.  —  Complying  with  your  request  for  criticism  and  con- 
structive suggestions  regarding  the  administration  of  the  Agricul- 
tural Law  relating  to  the  control  of  bovine  tuberculosis  in  New 
York  State,  the  New  York  Milk  Committee  submits  for  your  con- 
sideration  the  following  statements  which  are  based  upon  facts 
set  forth  in  memoranda  attached  herewith  which  are  in  turn  sup- 
ported by  documentary  evidence  which  is  to  be  delivered  personally 
to  you: 

1.  Bovine    tuberculosis    is    extensively    prevalent    among 

dairy  herds  throughout  New  York  State. 

2.  Bovine  tuberculosis  in  advanced  stages  exists  in  a  large 

percentage  of  cattle  found  reactors  by  the  tuberculin 
test  in  New  York  State. 

3.  Bovine  tuberculosis  is  uncontrolled  in  New  York  State. 

4.  The  tuberculin  test  is  improperly  applied  and  results  cor- 

respondingly inaccurate. 

5.  Cattle  known  to  react  to  the  tuberculin  test  are  passed 

as  free  from  the  disease  by  the  State. 

6.  Veterinary  tuberculin  is  inadequately  accounted  for  in 

its  distribution  and  use. 

7  .      Bang  system  herds  are  not  properly  supervised  and  pro- 

visions in  the  law  to  protect  public  health  are  not 
complied  with. 

8  .      Under  the  existing  law  there  is  no  systematic  provision 

for  State  supervision  of  slaughter  houses  and  diseased 
carcasses. 


759 

9.  The  State  Department  of  Agriculture  fails  to  identify 

diseased  cattle,  after  diagnosis,  by  branding  to 
prevent : 

(a)  Switching  animals  that  have  reacted  to  the  tubercu- 

lin test,  have  been  appraised,  and  before  being- 
slaughtered. 

(b)  Traffic  in  '*  plugged  "  cattle. 

(c)  Unlawful  disposal  of  unbranded  tuberculous  cattle 

after  being  held  under  the  Bang  system. 

10.  The  Department  of  Agriculture  fails  to  carry  out  the 

Bang  system  as  provided  by  law  and  intended  to  re- 
place high  grade  diseased  stock  with  young  healthy 
animals. 

11.  Acts  on  the  part  of  representatives  of  the  Department 

of  Agriculture  show  either  collusion  or  criminal  care- 
lessness. 

12.  The  Department  of  Agriculture  exercises  bad  business 

management. 

The  New  York  Committee  will  be  glad  to  avail  itself  of  the 
opportunity  which  you  have  offered  to  submit  later  some  construc- 
tive suggestions  working  toward  more  adequate  control  of  bovine 
tuberculosis  and  its  ultimate  eradication. 

Very  truly  yours, 
NEW  YORK  MILK  COMMITTEE, 

PAUL  E.  TAYLOR,  Secretary. 


760 

11/25/14. 

NEW  YOKK  MILK  COMMITTEE 
CONTROL  OF  BOVINE  TUBERCULOSIS 

In  March,  1914,  great  activity  was  noted  on  the  part  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  and  the  dairy  interests  in  urging  the 
passage  of  Webb  Assembly  bill  No.  986  and  Wheeler  Senate  bill 
No.  1315. 

On  March  25,  1914,  the  New  York  Milk  Committee  submitted 
to  each  member  of  the  legislature,  and  to  the  public  press,  a  five- 
page  memorandum  (Exhibit  AA)  dealing  with  the  Webb  bill  and 
the  bovine  tuberculosis  situation  in  New  York  State.  It  was 
pointed  out  that  this  bill  called  for  an  amendment  of  that  part  of 
the  Agricultural  Law  relating  to  the  control  and  extermination  of 
bovine  tuberculosis  by  providing  for  compulsory  physical  exam- 
ination of  all  dairy  cows  and  the  slaughter  of  animals  found  to 
have  tuberculosis,  as  determined  by  such  physical  examination. 
Payment  for  cattle  slaughtered  was  the  same  as  provided  for  under 
the  present  law,  with  the  exception  that  where  the  disease  was 
found  to  be  generalized  the  indemnity  was  not  to  exceed  $15.00, 
together  with  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of  the  carcass  and  hide. 
The  Committee  urged  that  no  further  legislation  be  enacted  until 
the  situation  was  squarely  met  and  a  real  constructive  program 
formulated  to  ensure  the  eventual  elimination  of  this  dangerous 
disease  from  New  York  State's  dairy  herds. 

Facts  were  presented  showing  the  prevalence  of  bovine  tuber- 
culosis among  New  York  dairy  herds  and  herds  of  other  States 
and  countries.  Authoritative  statements  as  to  the  efficiency  of 
various  methods  of  detecting  this  disease  were  presented,  as  also 
means  of  transmission  of  the  disease  from  cow  to  cow;  from  cow 
to  calf;  from  cow  to  man.  The  results  of  scientific  investigation 
by  government  commissions  and  laboratories  having  international 
reputation  were  presented  showing  the  dangers  of  the  transmission 
of  this  disease  to  the  human,  particularly  children.  The  dangers 
of  permitting  diseased  cows,  not  detected  by  physical  examination, 
to  go  uncontrolled  and  spread  the  infection  were  set  forth. 

It  was  pointed  out  that  the  Webb  bill  offered  no  real  solution 
of  the  problem  confronting  New  York  State,  either  from  a  public 


761 

health  or  economic  standpoint,  and  the  enormous  expenditure 
which  would  be  required  to  carry  out  its  provisions  would  not  be 
warranted  by  results  which  might  reasonably  be  expected. 

Following  this  memorandum  a  campaign  was  undertaken  by 
the  New  York  Milk  Committee  to  bring  to  the  attention  of  the 
general  public  facts  bearing  upon  present  conditions  to  show  the 
urgent  necessity  of  the  adoption  of  adequate  remedial  measures 
in  the  interests  of  public  health  and  in  the  best  interests  of  the. 
dairy  industry  itself.  The  facts  which  were  given  publicity  were 
based  almost  entirely  upon  documentary  evidence  received  from 
the  New  York  State  Department  of  Agriculture,  or  upon  testi- 
mony or  information  which  can  be  corroborated  by  persons  having 
knowledge  of  the  transactions  referred  to,  or  by  records  on  file 
in  the  State  Department  of  Agriculture. 

The  points  made  are  divided  into  two  main  headings: 

A.  FACTS  SHOWING  PRESENT  SITUATION  AS  DANGEROUS  TO  PUBLIC  HEALTH. 

B.  FACTS   SHOWING  INEFFICIENCY  AND  ACTS  DETRIMENTAL  TO  THE  BEST 

INTERESTS    OF    THE    STATE   IN    THE    ADMINISTRATION    OF    THE   PRESENT 
LAW. 

A.  FACTS  SHOWING  PRESENT  SITUATION  AS  DANGEROUS  TO  PUBLIC  HEALTH. 

1.     Bovine  tuberculosis  is  extensively  prevalent  among  dairy  herds  through- 
out the  State. 

(a)  In  thirty-nine  counties  of  New  York  State,  in  1907,  out  of  421 

herds  tested,  302,  or  seventy-one  (71)  per  cent,  contained  cattle 
that  reacted;  and  out  of  the  9,638  animals  tested,  3,432,  or 
thirty- five  (35)  per  cent,  reacted.  (Bovine  Tuberculosis,  by  Dr. 
Veranus  A.  Moore). 

(b)  Published  reports  of  New  York  State  Department  of  Agriculture. 

on  animals  tested  and  retested,  by  the  State,  show  that  re- 
actors were  found  in  nineteen  (19)  per  cent,  of  the  cases,  in 
1912,  and  sixteen  (16)  per  cent,  in  1913.  (Exhibit  I). 

(c)  If  certified  herds,  which  are  retest  herds,  be  eliminated  the  State 

figures  would  show  a  much  higher  percentage  of  reactors,  as 
shown  in  the  case  of  Orange  county  for  1913,  for  which  is  given 
a  percentage  of  reactors  of  9.1  for  all  herds  tested.  By  elimi- 
nating certified  herds  (Alexander  Campbell  herd  and  four  herds 
tested  by  Dr.  H.  D.  Gill,  veterinarian  to  the  New  York  County 
Medical  Milk  Commission)  the  percentage  is  found  to  be  twenty 
(20).  (Exhibit  LI). 

(d)  In    certain    counties    the    percentage    of    reactors    is    considerably 

greater  than  the  average  for  the  State.  Tests  made  in  the  fol- 
lowing counties  for  the  year  ending  October  1,  1913,  taken  from 
data  appearing  in  Exhibit  III,  show: 


762 

ANIMALS 

Total 

County 

Animals 

Tested 

Delaware  .  . 

.  .  .  .   93,237 

436 

Erie    

.  .  .  .   54,567 

471 

Herkimer  .  . 

54,124 

193 

Clinton  .   . 

33,021 

208 

Ulster  

.  ...   29,361 

435 

Albay 

.  .  .  .    18,231 

116 

Reacted     Per  cent 

114  26.1 

206  43.7 

86  44.0 

73  35.4 

143  32 . 9 

53  45.7 

2.  Bovine  tuberculosis  in  advanced  stages  exists  in  a  large  percentage  of 

cattle  found  reactors  by  the  tuberculin  test. 

(a)  Postmortems   of   reactors   shows   a  high  percentage   of  generalized 

tuberculosis  cases.  Below  is  list  of  counties  having  largest  num- 
bers of  dairy  cows:  (Exhibit  III). 

(b)  The  number  of  postmortems  of  reactors    (Number  of  animals  con- 

demned less  number  of  animals  held  under  the  Bang  system  and 
number  of  animals  having  died)  for  the  entire  State,  for  year  end- 
ing October  1,  1913,  show  out  of  a  total  of  2,055,  twenty-eight  (28) 
per  cent,  generalized  cases.  (Exhibit  III). 

(c)  United  States  census  for   1910  report  438,329   calves  and   1,509,594 

cows  in  the  State  of  New  York,  making  a  total  of  1,947,923  cows 
and  calves.  If  the  percentage  of  reactors  among  animals  tested 
reported  by  the  State  Department  of  Agriculture  in  1913,  is  ap- 
plied to  total  animals,  the  number  of  tuberculous  cows  and  calves 
in  the  State  is  311,668.  If  the  percentage  of  generalized  cases  of 
tuberculosis  shown  by  postmortem  in  1913  be  applied,  there  -<\r« 
87,267  cases  of  generalized  tuberculosis  in  the  State 

3.  Bovine  tuberculosis  is  uncontrolled. 

(a)  Condition  of  approximately  ninety-eight  (98)  per  cent,  of  the  dairy 
animals  (cows  and  calves)  is  unknown  to  the  Department  or' 
Agriculture.  (Exhibit  III  and  United  States  Census  figures,  1910, 
as  to  number  of  animals). 

The  Department  of  Agriculture  states  that  ninety -seven  (97) 
per  cent,  of  the  dairy  cattle  were  not  tested  in  1913  and  under 
no  systematic  scheme  of  supervision  insofar  as  their  health  is  con- 
cerned. (Exhibit  IV,  pg.  5). 

Number  of  Post-     Percent. 

Rank  as  to  Number  mortem  of  Generalized 

County                 of  Dairy  Animals  Reactors  Tuberculosis 

St.    Lawrence    First  53                         43 

Delaware Second  69                         24 

Jefferson Third  53                         35 

Oneida Fourth  31                         19 

Cattaragus Fifth  17                        47 

Otsego Sixth  220                        19 

Chautauqua Seventh  60                        23 

Orange Eighth  31                        29 

Erie..                                .  Ninth  159                         31 


763 

4.  The  tuberculin  test  is  improperly  applied  and  results  inaccurate. 

(a)  "Our  experience  indicates  that  the  subcutaneous  tuberculin  test,  as 
commonly  used,  is  not  as  thoroughly  conducted  as  is  advisable, 
there  being  insufficient  time  taken  to  do  the  work  properly  and  in 
many  cases  the  results  are  correspondingly  inaccurate."  Annual 
Report,  1913,  Bureau  of  Veterinary  Service,  by  J.  C.  Wills,  chief 
veterinarian.  ( Exhibit  IV,  pg.  9 ) . 

5.  Cattle  known  to  react  to  the  tuberculin  test  are  passed  as  free  from  the 

disease. 

(a)  Case  of  Simon  herd,  Orr's  Mills,  X.  Y.,  in  official  charts  of  tests 
show  reactors  which  were  passed.  (Exhibit  V). 

6.  Cattle  known  to  be  diseased  were  not  branded  to  prevent  fraud  and 

their  becoming  disseminators  of  the  disease. 

(a)  Unpublished  report  of  Chief  Veterinarian  Wills,  1913:   "It  is  ques- 

tionable whether  tuberculous  animals  should  be  allowed  to  be  sold 
or  distributed,  promiscuously,  without  any  attempt  at  control.  The 
permanent  branding  or  marking  of  such  animals  might  serve  to 
sufficiently  identify  them  and  thus  place  them  under  the  necessary 
surveillance."  (Exhibit  IV,  pg.  8). 

(b)  The  Agricultural  Law  provides   "That  all  cattle  shall  be  branded 

unless  otherwise  directed  in  writing  by  the  Commissioner  of  Agri- 
culture." Mr.  Huson,  Commissioner  of  Agriculture,  has  stated 
that  he  has  never  given  permission  not  to  brand  any  reacting  ani- 
mals. (Exhibit  A,  affidavit  of  Messrs.  Griffin  and  Taylor). 

(c)  Unbranded  diseased  cattle  shipped  as  healthy,  as  shown  in: 

(1)  Case,   United   States  vs.   J.   Frank   Donahue,   Grafton,  Mass., 

before  U.  S.  Court.  Shown  that  reacting,  unbranded  cattle, 
tested  and  reacting  at  Utica,  were  shipped  as  healthy.  (Ex- 
hibit VII,  report  of  Dr.  Mullings,  United  States  Bureau  of 
Animal  Industry). 

(2)  Case,  United  States  vs.  C.  F.  Hunt,  Oran,  N.  Y.,  dealer  and 

breeder  of  Holstein-Freisian  cattle.  Sale  of  Fidgama  II, 
register  No.  56,771;  Ruth  Tekstra  III,  register  No.  67,305; 
Dora  Pietertze  Johanna  Ormsby,  register  No.  93,294.  Ex- 
hibit VII,  report  of  Dr.  Mullings,  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Animal 
Industry). 

7.  Tuberculin  is  inadequately  accounted  for  in  its  distribution  and  use. 
(a)   This  is  based  on  statements  of  Chief  Veterinarian  Wills  to  Griffin 

and  Taylor  (Exhibit  B)  and  affidavits  of  Messrs.  Larson,  McDowall 
and  Myers  regarding  the  purchase  of  tuberculin  (Exhibits  C,  D 
and  E)  at  New  York  drug  stores  without  giving  information  to 
the  clerk  as  provided  for  in  article  5,  section  64  of  the  Agricultural 
Law,  which  states 

"  All  persons  selling  or  giving  away  tuberculin  shall  report  to  the  Com- 
missioner of  Agriculture  the  amount  of  tuberculin  sold  or  given  away; 
the  degree  of  strength;  the  name  and  address  of  the  person  to  whom  sold 


764 

or  given  and  the  date  of  delivery;  said  report  shall  include  the  address 
of  and  be  signed  by  the  person  making  it."  (Tuberculin  purchased 
marked  Exhibits  F,  G  and  H). 

NOTE. —  Tuberculin  is  furnished  by  Cornell ;  New  York  City  Department 
of  Health;  Parke,  Davis  and  Company,  New  York;  Mulford  Drug  Co., 
New  York.  Furnished  free  by  State  and  by  drug  firms  at  various  prices 
from  thirty  cents  to  one  dollar  a  dose.  The  "  plugging "  practice  is 
believed  to  be  quite  general. 

8.  Bang  system  herds  are  not  properly  supervised  and  provisions  in  law 

to  protect  public  health  are  not  complied  with. 

(a)  The  responsibility  for  the  supervision  and  control  of  Bang  herds  as 
provided  for  in  article  5,  section  98  is  not  carried  out  in  that  the! 
chief  veterinarian  does  not  have  direct  control  over  such  animals, 
his  duties  being  assumed  by  a  layman,  Deputy  Commissioner  Win- 
ters. (Exhibit  A.  affidavit  Taylor  and  Griffin). 

(b)   Department   fails    to    supervise    cows   under    Bang    contract,    as 
shown  : 

(1)  Case  of  Mrs.  J.  R.  Hathaway,  Homer,  N.  Y.;  calves  not  seg- 

regated; no  pasteurizer  used.     (Exhibit  I,  affidavit  Griffin). 

(2)  John  Finley,  Vailsgate,  N.  Y.     Cows  used  for  feeding  calves. 

Not     pasteurized.        (Exhibit      III,      Memorandum      Board 
of  Health,  New  York  City). 

From  middle  of  February,  1914  to  middle  of  April,  1914. 
milk  shipped  raw  from  this  herd  to  Joseph  Corkerdale,  New 
York;  sold  raw.  Inspection  statement  New  York  City  De- 
partment of  Health.  (Exhibit  IX,  memorandum  Board  of 
Health,  New  York  City). 

9.  Under  the  existing  law  there  is  no  systematic  provision  for  State  super- 

vision of  slaughter  houses  and  diseased  carcasses. 

(a)  "The  adoption  of  a  method  of  stamping  all  carcasses  fit  for  food 

purposes  is  contemplated."     (Exhibit  IV,  Chief  Veterinarian  Wills, 
Annual  Report,  1913,  pg.  11). 

(b)  Recommendations  of  Chief  Veterinarian  Wills  providing  for  a  state 

wide  meat  inspection  service.      (Exhibit  IV,  pg.  27.) 

(c)  Dr.  Wills'  statement:     "The  close  relation  of  this  traffic  to  that  of 

diseased  and  other  unwholesome  meats  emphasizes  the  recom 
mendations  made  in  previous  reports  as  to  the  necessity  of  a 
State  meat  inspection  service."  (Exhibit  IV,  Pg.  3.) 

B.  FACTS  SHOWING  INEFFICIENCY  AND  ACTS  DETRIMENTAL  TO  THE  BEST  INTER 

ESTS  OF  THE  STATE  IN  THE  ADMINISTRATION  OF  THE  PRESENT  LAW. 

1.     The  Department  fails   to   identify  diseased  cattle,  after  diagnosis,  by 

branding,  to  prevent: 

(a)  "Switching"  after  animals  have  reacted,  have  been  appraised  and 
before  being  slaughtered. 


765 

( 1 )  Case  8822,  Exhibit  X.  For  year  ending  October  1,  1913, 
nineteen  (19)  reacting  cattle  were  found  in  a  herd  on 
McLaury  Bros.'  farm,  Portlandville ;  appraised  at  $1,220. 
Postmortem  report  shows  that  of  the  nineteen  (19)  reactors 
nine  (9)  were  localized  cases,  three  generalized,  and  seven 
(7)  no-lesions.  The  fact  that  seven  cases  were  reported  as 
having  no  lesions  suggest  that  seven  (7),  less  valuable  but 
healthy  animals,  were  substituted  for  the  reactors. 

That  this  is  entirely  possible  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  tht 
tests  were  made  by  Drs.  Hamilton  and  Stebbins;  the  ap- 
praisal by  Mr.  Marshall;  postmortem  by  Dr.  Lynch. 

(b)  Traffic  in  "plugged"  cattle. 

(c)  Unlawful  disposal  of  unbranded  tuberculous  cattle  reported  as  bein« 

held  under  the  Bang  system. 

( 1 )  Of  eight  ( 8 )  cows  reported  as  placed  under  the  Bang  system 
three  (3)  on  Nov.  14,  1912;  two  (2)  Nov.  18,  1910;  three 
(3)  Nov.  6,  1910,  by  Zoller,  Hammond,  N.  Y.,  two  (2)  are 
reported  as  having  died  on  December  1,  1913.  (Exhibit  X, 
animal  numbers  146,516,  175,859,  163,632,  294,  31,  63,  64) 
and  six  (6)  on  Dec.  3,  1913. 

Note. —  While  it  is  not  proven  that  these  cows  were  unlawfully  dis- 
posed of,  it  appears  strange  that  these  eight  (8)  cows  should  have  diec? 
within  two  days. 

2.  The  Department  fails  to  carry  out  the  Bang  system,  as  provided  by 
law  and  intended  to  replace  high-grade  diseased  stock  with  young 
healthy  animals  by 

(a)  Distribution   of   high-grade   reading   cattle   among'   individuals    arid 

institutions,  manifesting  no  attempt  to  carry  out  the  provision  or 
intent  of  the  law. 

(1)  State  cattle  on  premises  of  J.  H.  Hathaway,  Homer,  N.  Y. 

Thirty-two  (32)  registered  animals  sent  to  Hathaway  farm. 
No  pasteurizer.  Calves  not  segregated.  (Exhibit  XIX  and 
Exhibit  I). 

(2)  Nine   (9)   cows  sent  to  J.  Findlay,  Vailsgate,  N.  Y.;   carried 

on  Department  records  as  being  placed  under  the  Bang 
system.  No  pasteuri/er.  Milk  sold  vaw  in  New  York 
market.  (Exhibits  VIII,  XVTII  and  IX K 

(3)  U.  S.  Belief  Corps  Home,  Oxford,  N.  Y.,  received  thirty-three 

(33)  state  cattle  reported  as  being  held  under  the  Bang  sys- 
)  tern  from  September,  1912,  to  January,  1914.     Twenty-five 

(25)  of  these  cows  were  slaughtered  during  the  first  year. 
John  Colton,  Oxford,  N.  Y.,  states :  "  There  has  never  been 
a  calf  raised  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge."  (Exhibits  XI, 
XII  and  XIII). 

(b)  Grade  and  registered  animals  paid  for  by  the  State  at  80  per  cent. 

of  their  appraised  value  and  consigned  under  the  Bang  system  to 
persons  and  institutions  are  slaughtered  shortly  after  arrival. 


766 

(1)    Lincoln  Agricultural  School  and  New  York  Catholic  Protec- 
tory;   out  of  eighty    (80)    cows  consigned  under  the  Bang 
system  and  slaughtered  within  one  year,  eighteen   ( 18 )   were 
killed  during  the  first  month;  thirteen   (13)   during  the  sec- 
ond month;    six    (6)    during  the  third  month   and  twenty- 
four  (24)  from  the  third  to  the  sixth  month.     (Exhibit  XI). 
NO-IE. —  Rev.    Brother    Barnabas    states    he   had    a   verbal    agreement    with 
Deputy   Commissioner    Winters    to    slaughter    certain   animals    whenever    he 
deemed  it  advisable.      (Exhibit  J,  affidavit  of  S.  G.  Williams.) 

NOTE. —  The  New  York  Milk  Committee  has  no  criticism  of  the  manner  in 
which  the  Lincoln  Agricultural  School  conducts  its  Bang  herd  —  in  fact,  Mr. 
Griffin  reported  that  the  cows  actually  held  under  the  Bang  system  and 
their  offspring  were  kept  in  strict  compliance  with  the  law,  and  so  far  as 
he  could  ascertain,  all  milk  from  these  cows  was  properly  pasteurized  be- 
fore being  used. 

(c)  The  Department  gives  no  statistical  evidence  in  public  reports  show- 

ing the  number  of  healthy  calves  raised  under  the  Bang  system. 
So  far  as  can  be  learned  the  Department  has  no  complete  infor- 
mation on  this  subject. 

(d)  Milk  from  Bang  herds  fed  raw  to  calves  and  sold  raw  in  New  York 

city  for  food  purposes.      (Exhibits  VIII  and  XIX). 

(e)  Provisions    of    the   law:      (Agricultural    Law,   article    5,    section    98) 

"  The  Chief  Veterinarian  shall,  under  the  direction  of  the  Com- 
missioner of  Agriculture,  have  general  charge  of  the  enforcement 
of  the  provisions  of  tjhis  article";  are  not  carried  out  in  respect 
to  supervision  and  control  of  Bang  herds,  in  that  this  work  ha^ 
been  delegated  to  Deputy  Agricultural  Commissioner  Winters 
(Exhibit  A,  affidavit  Taylor  and  Griffin). 

3.  The  Department  fails  to  condemn  cattle  giving  a  typical  reaction  to 

tuberculin. 
(a)   Simon  herd,  Orr's  Mills,  N.  Y.     (Exhibit  V). 

NOTE. —  Normal  temperature  of  cow  approximately  102.  Tubei-alin  reaction 
is  positive  if  there  is  a  rise  of  2  degrees  F.  above  maximium  temperature 
during  period  before  test.  Seventeen  (17)  cattle  in  herd  mentioned  had  rise 
of  more  than  two  degrees  F.;  four  were  condemned. 

4.  Collusion  or  criminal  carelessness  of  Department's  representatives. 

(a)  Carcass  having  generalized  condition  of  tuberculosis  bearing  stamp 
of  the  N.  Y.  State  Department  of  Agriculture,  "  Passed  37,"  sold 
for  food  purposes  at  Poughkeepsie.  (Exhibit  XIV). 

5.  The  Department  of  Agriculture  exercises  bad  business  management, 
(a)   Cows  reacting,  appraised  at  high  value  and  paid  for  by  the  State, 

reported  as  placed  under  the  Bang  system,  slaughtered  almost  im- 
mediately and  little  or  no  returns  made  to  the  'State  Treasury 
for  carcasses  passed  for  food  purposes. 

(1)  Case  No.   8475,   Exhibit   XV,   shows  that   on   seven    (7)    cows 
condemned  in  herd  of  Ralph  Butler,  Homer,  N.  Y.,  appraised 


767 

at  $480,  an  indemnity  of  $363.25  was  granted.  One  cow 
was  slaughtered  immediately  and  found  to  have  generalized 
tuberculosis.  The  remaining  six  (6)  cows  were  reported  as 
sent  to  Lincolndale,  to  be  held  under  the  Bang  system, 
December  28,  1912,  along  with  another  lot  of  ten  cows 
owned  by  M.  J.  Peck,  cow  dealer,  Cortland,  N.  Y.,  which 
were  appraised  at  $520  and  on  which  an  indemnity  of  $416 
was  granted  by  the  State.  (Exhibit  XV,  case  8460).  Of 
the  sixteen  (16)  cows  sent  to  Lincolndale,  to  be  held  under 
the  Bang  system,  fourteen  (14)  were  slaughtered  for  food 
purposes  within  seven  months  (Exhibits  XV  and  XI)  and  a 
return  of  $41.10  made  to  the  State  Treasury.  Of  fourteen 
(14)  cows  consigned  December  28,  1912,  to  Lincolndale, 
four  (4)  were  slaughtered  on  January  10,  1913.  (Exhibit 
XI). 

(b)  Case  No.  8846,  Exhibit  XV,  shows  that  three    (3)   cows  condemned 

for  tuberculosis,  owned  by  E.  J.  Bowdish,  Cortland,  two  of  which 
on  postmortem  were  found  to  (have  localized  condition,  the  re- 
maining one  to  have  no  lesions,  were  appraised  at  $180  and  an 
indemnity  of  $128.25  was  granted,  while  only  $7.00  was  returned 
to  the  State. 

(c)  Comparison  of  weights  of  carcasses  of  animals  slaughtered  at  Bing- 

hamton,  Cortland  and  Albany  slaughter  houses  and  passed  for  food 
purposes  shows:  (Exhibit  XVI,  Treasurer's  Statement,  1913,  as 
furnished  by  Department  of  Agriculture). 

NOTE;. —  It  is  reported  that  during  the  greater  part  of  this  period  the  Albany 
slaughter  house  had  no  facilities  for  weighing  carcasses  and  that  weigfhts 
were  estimated. 

Number          Total  weight,      Average  weight, 

Place  slaughtered  pounds  pounds 

Binghamton 39  13,281  345 

Cortland 66  24,132  365 

Albany 258  76,670  297 


(d)  Comparison  of  returns   received  for  carcasses   passed  for   food  pur- 

poses show  for  tihe  same  lot: 

Binghamton 7V2  cents  per  pound 

Cortland 6%  cents  per  pound 

Albany 5       cents  per  pound 

(e)  Comparison  of  the  average  returns  for  hides  were: 

Binghamton $6  75  each 

Cortland 5  71  each 

Albany 3  32  each 

(f)  Comparison  of  charges  for  slaughtering  and  expenses  were: 

Binghamton $3  06 

Cortland '. 2  00 

Albany 5  04 

NOTE. — About    the    time   of    the   aroused    public    interest    in    this    subject, 
twenty-two   (22)    cattle  were  sent  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  to  the 


768 

New  York  Butchers'  Dressed  Meat  Company  for  slaugher  with  the  following 

return  report: 

Total    weight    of    carcasses,    8,950    pounds;    average    weight,    407    pounds; 

average    returns    9  1-3    cents    per    pound;    average    returns    per    hide,    $5.62; 

average  returns  per  animal,  $43.50.      (Exhibit  XVII,  Treasurer's   Statement, 

1913,  as  furnished  by  Department  of  Agriculture.) 

(g)  Of  the  eighty-nine  (89)  Cortland  county  reacting  cows  purchased 
by  the  Cortland  Beef  Company,  sixty-six  (66)  of  which  are 
reported  as  passed  for  food  purposes,  a  return  was  made  to  the 
State  of  $1,848.28  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  October  1,  1913.  Of 
the  remaining  seventy-seven  (77)  animals  condemned  in  Cortland 
county  and  slaughtered,  fifty  (50)  passing  for  food  purposes,  a 
return  was  made  to  the  Department  of  but  $431.68.  It  appears 
therefore  that  for  the  sixty-six  (66)  cattle  purchased  by  the 
Cortland  Beef  Company,  the  average  return  of  $26.01  per  animal 
was  made  to  the  State,  whereas  the  fifty  (50)  remaining  animals 
from  Cortland  county,  not  purchased  by  the  company  show  a 
return  of  but  $306.06  or  an  average  of  $6.12  each.  (Exhibits  III 
and  XVI.) 

(h)  Case  No.  9070. —  Exhibit  XV  shows  sixty-two  (62)  cows  belonging 
to  J.  R.  Hathaway,  Homer,  N.  Y.,  were  examined  by  Dr.  J.  B. 
Knapp,  ten  (10)  of  which  were  condemned  and  were  appraised  at 
$685  by  J.  D.  Edwards.  Six  (6)  of  the  condemned  cows  are 
reported  as  having!  been  "  sent  to  William  Holl,  Homer,  N.  Y.," 
to  be  iheld  under  the  Bang  system  and  an  indemnity  of  $539.50  is 
shown  to  have  been  paid  to  Hathaway.  (William  Holl  was  at 
this  time  an  employee  on  the  Hathaway  farm). 

MILK  POWDER 

It  is  claimed  that  in  1915  there  was  produced  in  the  State  of 
JSTew  York  approximately  twelve  million  pounds  of  milk  powder. 
To  produce  this  quantity  of  dessicated  milk  solids  required  approxi- 
mately one  hundred  million  pounds  of  milk,  which,  at  an  average 
price  of  $1.60  per  hundred  pounds,  brought  to  the  dairymen  of 
the  State  $1,600,000.  This  product  of  the  dairies  in  the  State  of 
New  York  was  effectually  removed  from  competition  with  other 
producers  of  market  milk  and  was  necessarily  of  great  advantage 
to  the  dairymen  of  the  State.  The  development  and  perfection 
of  the  processes  necessary  to  produce  a  satisfactory  article  of  mer- 
chandise of  this  kind  required  large  investment  of  capital,  long 
study  and  most  precise  and  careful  methods.  Large  manufactur- 
ing plants  have  been  established  in  certain  sections  of  the  State 
devoted  to  the  manufacture  of  this  article.  It  is  probably  the  most 
advanced  and  satisfactory  method  of  preserving  the  solids  of  milk 


TOO 

in  their  natural  state  that  has  yet  been  devised.  It  brings  into 
the  field  an  entirely  new  product  which  offers  a  comparatively 
inexpensive  and  satisfactory  substitute  for  fluid  milk,  cheese  or 
butter.  Both  the  butter  making  process  and  the  cheese  making 
process  had  for  their  end  the  preservation  from  decay  of  milk 
solids  as  a  sustaining  article  of  food.  The  origin  of  the  processes 
is  concealed  in  the  dawn  of  civilization.  In  those  processes,  the 
chemical  qualities  of  the  milk  solids  are  changed  and  altered  and 
are  no  longer  capable  of  being  restored  to  their  original  form. 
While  immensely  valuable  as  a  food  product,  they  are  no  longer 
available  and  suitable  for  human  food  in  the  form  of  fluid  milk. 
They  cannot  supply  the  place  of  fluid  milk.  In  the  beginning, 
the  butter  and  cheese  processes  were  after  all  but  crude  attempts 
to  preserve  the  life-sustaining  milk  solids  for  use  as  food  at  times 
and  places  when  fluid  milk  could  not  be  had,  and  permit  of  their 
being  carried  on  long  journeys. 

Many  improvements  and  refinements  of  the  processes  have 
been  made,  but  the  elemental  processes  remain  as  practiced 
when  butter  and  cheese  sustained  the  Tartar  hordes  that  in- 
vaded Europe.  It  has  remained  for  the  chemist  and  busi- 
ness man  of  the  twentieth  century  to  develop  and  perfect  the 
method  by  which  milk  solids  may  be  preserved  for  long  periods 
of  time  in  practically  the  original  chemical  state.  It  may  now 
be  safely  asserted  that  all  the  solids  of  the  natural  milk  can  be 
preserved  for  months  in  nearly  any  climate  and  transported  to 
remote  sections  of  the  earth  in  their  natural  state.  They  may 
there  be  restored  to  the  condition  of  fluid  milk  by  the  addition  of 
the  normal  quantity  of  water  merely.  This  is  a  scientific  and 
industrial  achievement  of  the  first  order.  If  economic  develop- 
ment in  the  future  permits  these  processes  to  be  carried  on,  at 
an  expense  less  than  the  freight  charges  on  fluid  milk,  the  time 
will  come  when  the  transportation  of  .the  88  pounds  of  water  in 
every  100  pounds  of  milk  by  freight  will  be  obviated  and  only  the 
milk  solids  transported.  This  may  not  be  expected  in  the  near 
future,  but  it  may  not  be  a  result  impossible  to  accomplish.  Such 
a  development  will  mean  a  complete  revolution  in  the  methods  of 
supplying  the  city  consumer  with  fluid  milk. 


770 

The  Merrell  Soule  Company  of  Syracuse  now  manufactures  in 
various  counties  in  this  State  many  carloads  of  this  milk  powder 
which  is  sold  and  carried  by  freight  to  the  larger  butter  factories 
of  the  West  where  the  product  is  restored  to  the  condition  of  fluid 
milk,  practically,  and  used  as  fresh  milk  in  the  manufacture  of 
creamery  butter.  It  is  there  added  to  other  collected  butter  fats 
to  freshen  and  improve  their  quality  and  churned  as  a  whole.  The 
butter  so  manufactured  is  again  reshipped  to  the  cities  of  this 
State.  The  milk  powder  is  also  shipped  in  large  volume  to  the 
tropics  and  many  other  places.  By  the  addition  of  tepid  water  in 
the  normal  quantity  to  these  separated  milk  solids,  practically 
normal  milk  is  reproduced  which  appears  to  have  all  the  qualities 
of  fresh  milk  or  fresh  cream.  The  powder  itself  can  be  preserved 
in  unsealed  containers,  if  kept  reasonably  dry,  for  longer  than 
thirty  days.  While  the  container  is  sealed  under  the  same  condi- 
tions, it  can  be  preserved  for  a  sufficient  length  of  time  to  be 
made  available  for  daily  use  anywhere.  The  following  descrip- 
tion of  these  processes  is  given  to  the  Committee  by  Professor 
George  W.  Cavanaugh  of  the  State  College  of  Agriculture  at  Cor- 
nell University,  but  this  testimony  does  not  comprise  all  the  study 
of  the  Committee  in  the  matter. 

Professor  CAVANAUGH,  called  and  sworn,  testified: 
"  For  about  ten  years,  I  have  been  at  the  head  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agricultural  Chemistry  in  the  State  College  of  Agricul- 
ture and  during  that  period  and  before  have  studied  the  chemistry 
of  milk.  About  ten  years  ago  we  had  the  opportunity  of  taking 
up  a  study  of  the  manufacture  of  milk  powder,  and  have  been 
interested  in  that  subject  from  that  time  until  the  present.  The 
history  of  the  production  of  milk  powders  or  powdered  milk  goes 
back  twenty  or  twenty-five  years.  If  one  looks  over  the  patent 
records,  he  will  find  that  patents  have  been  taken  out  not  only  in 
this  country,  but  in  England,  France  and  Germany  as  long  as 
twenty-five  years  ago.  Most  of  those  have  never  materialized  in 
a  practical  way.  The  practical  development  began  some  twelve 
or  thirteen  years  ago  along  two  general  lines.  First,  the  practice 
of  drying  local  milk  on  a  rotating  heated  surface  of  cylinders. 
These  two  cylinders  rotating,  impinge  one  on  the  other,  and  the 


m 

milk  is  put  in  between  the  two.  The  cylinders  are  heated  in- 
directly with  steam,  and  this  thin  film  is  dried  during  the  process 
of  rotation  and  then  scraped  off  and  then  ground  up  by  appropriate 
machinery  and  you  have  the  milk  powder.  You  have  all  the  solids 
then,  but  not  exactly  in  their  original  condition. 

Milk  is  an  emulsion,  a  solution,  and  it  is  further,  something  else 
that  the  modern  physicist  and  chemist  calls  a  colloid.  I  don't  know 
how  to  define  a  colloid  properly  much  better  than  to  say  it  is 
about  one-half  solution.  It  is  neither  completely  dissolved  nor  is 
it  in  what  we  know  as  a  physical  emulsion.  The  fat  in  milk 
is  in  the  form  of  an  emulsion.  The  sugar  and  the  albumen  and 
portions  of  the  ash  are  in  part  solution.  The  casein  or  the  curd 
is  present  in  the  form  of  a  colloid,  a  kind  of  semi-solution.  In 
the  drying  process  I  have  described,  unless  certain  precautions 
are  taken,  the  properties  of  one  or  the  other  of  these  various  con- 
stituents may  be  slightly  altered.  If  the  heat  of  the  roller  is  too 
high  some  of  the  albumen  may  be  coagulated,  the  same  as  boiling 
the  white  of  an  egg.  Some  of  the  casein  of  the  milk  may  be 
partly  precipitated,  particularly  if  the  milk  happens  to  have  an 
appreciable  amount  of  acid,  during  the  process  of  condensing  this 
acid  concentrates  and  due  to  the  concentration  of  the  acid  and  the 
heat  there  is  a  tendency  for  the  casein  to  be  precipitated  or  thrown 
out  of  its  colloidal  condition.  If  that  result  comes  about,  it  is 
difficult  to  restore  the  milk  solids  to  their  original  condition  by 
the  addition  of  water.  You  cannot  say  '  dissolve '  because  they 
were  not  all  dissolved  in  the  first  place.  It  is  not  entirely  proper 
to  say  re-emulsified,  because  they  were  not  all  emulsified.  A  name 
has  been  adopted  to  describe  this  process,  that  is,  re-constitute. 
When  these  milk  solids  are  dried  at  too  high  a  temperature  on 
the  roll,  not  all  of  the  solids  can  be  reconstituted  necessarily  in 
their  original  condition. 

"  To  overcome  that  some  processes  add  a  very  small  trace  of  an 
alkali  to  neutralize  the  acids.  If  the  acid  is  neutralized,  then  the 
acid  does  not  have  this  precipitating  action  on  the  casein  and  the 
product  does  become  thoroughly  well  re-constituted.  The  acid 
used  is  ordinarily  a  trace  of  soda. 

"About  ten  years  ago,  there  was  developed  a  process  of  anothei 
kind  which  seemed  to  overcome  some  of  the  difficulties  in  the  way 


772 

of  the  process  just  described.  That  process  in  brief  consists  of 
blowing  the  milk  in  the  form,  of  as  fine  a  spray  as  can  be  produced 
into  a  heated  chamber  under  such  conditions  that  the  particles, 
of  tli©  spray  in  falling,  become  completely  evaporated,  so  that 
the  spray  enters  as  a  liquid  spray  and  falls  to  the  floor  as  a  dry 
powder.  The  apparatus  is  so  arranged  that  a  current  of  hot  air 
passes  through  and  carries  out  the  moisture  that  evaporates  from 
the  milk.  In  this  process*  when  rightly  conducted,  there  is  no 
need  of:  the  addition  of  any  alkali,  because  the  evaporation  from 
the  particles  of  spray  seems  to  be  so  rapid,  that  in  spite  of  the, 
heat  of  the  air  in  which  the  evaporation  is  going  on,  there  seems 
to  be  no  curdling  of  the  casein  or  coagulating  of  the  albumen,  and 
we  have  examined  many  samples-  that  show  that  none  of  the 
properties  of  the  original  milk  or  any  of  its  constituent  parts  is 
necessarily  changed  by  this  process  of  evaporation. 

"  The-  difficulty  in  both  processes  has  been  to  dry  the  milk  with 
all.  the  fat  in  it.  That  difficulty  seems  to  be  a  little  greater  in 
the  roller  process,  and  seems  now  to  have  been  pretty  well  over- 
come on  the  spray  process.  On  the  roller  process  the  fat  globules, 
tend  to  run  together  and  smear  together  to  some  extent  so  that 
when  the  powder  made  in  that  fashion  is  re-constituted  there  is  a 
little  tendency  for  a  layer  of  fat  to  appear  on  the  surface  of  the 
re-constituted  milk.  The  spray  process  seems  to  have  overcome 
that  so  effectively  that  not  only  do  they  now  dry  whole  milk,  but 
are  actually  drying  cream. 

"As  a  food  product,  this  powder  can  be  valued  directly  in  pro- 
portion to  its  solid  contents  with  any  other  milk.  Let  us  assume 
that  milk  solids  are  12%  per  cent  of  the  whole  volume,  as  an 
average^  or  one-eighth,  so  that  eight  pounds  of  milk  will  yield 
on  evaporation  one  pound  of  milk  solids  and  inasmuch  as  a  gallon 
of  milk  weighs  eight  pounds,  possibly  a  little  over,  you  can  get 
approximately  one  pound  of  milk  solids  from  one  gallon  of  milk, 
so  there  is  the  same  food  value  in  one  pound  of  this  whole  milk 
powder  as  in  eight  pounds  of  milk. 

"  Malted  milk  is  a  subject  that  must  not  be  confused  with  pow- 
dered milk.  The  so-called  malted  milk  is  a  product  consisting  of 
malt  and  milk  and  dried  to  a  powder.  They  are  not  in  the  same 
line  with  these  processes.  They  usually  contain  very  little  milk. 


773 

These  processes  are  patented.     The  spray  process  is  controlled  by 
the  Merrell  Soule  Company  of  Syracuse,  I  think 

"  One  of  the  principal  products  made  is  powdered  skim  milk, 
which  has  a  large  sale  among  bakers  in  the  cities.  They  seem  to- 
find  it  cheaper  to  buy  the  skim  milk  and  some  other  fat  than,  to-- 
buy  the  whole  milk,  so  that  most  of  the  concerns  that  make  the 
powdered  milk  buy  the  whole  milk  from  the  farmers  or  milk 
producers  and  then  sell  two  products,  cream  and  the  skim  milk 
powder.  The  whole  milk  powder  finds  its  market  with  the  con- 
fectioners and  ice  cream  men  and  with  the  type  of  baker  who  is 
baking  cakes,  where  he  wants  something  a  little  superior  to  other 
type  of  fat.  There  are  two  or  three  large  factories  in  the  West- 
ern part  of  the  State.  Probably  the  total  production  of  these 
powders  in  the  State  is  about  twelve  million  pounds  annually. 
That  would  be  about  one  hundred  million  pounds  of  milk.  There 
are  many  other  factories  about  the  State.  The  factories  I  know 
have  their  own  dairy  inspection  and  their  own  veterinarian.  The 
milk  is  received  under  the  rules>  as  nearly  as  may  be  laid  down- 
by  the  Board  of  Health  of  New  York  City.  The  milk  for  the 
production  of  the  skim  powder  is  first  separated.  Then  the  skim 
milk  is  pasteurized  at  a  temperature  that  all  dairymen  use  under 
conditions  of  good  pasteurization.  The  skim  milk  is.  then  con- 
densed in  the  same  way  that  condensed  milk  makers  condense 
their  milk,  namely,  in  a  vacuum  pan  and  the  condensed  milk  is 
then  put  through  the  spray  process,  the  reason  for 'that  being  it 
was  found  to  be  more  economical  to  condense  the  skim  milk  in  a 
condensing  pan  and  then  to  spray  than  it  was  to  spray  the  original 
milk.  The  capacity  of  the  plant  is  increased  thereby. 

"Absolutely  nothing  is  added  to  the  natural  milk  in  any  way, 
shape  or  manner.  The  whole  milk  powder  will  not  keep  as  long  as 
the  skim  milk  powder,  as  the  fats  tend  to  become  rancid.  Pasteur- 
ization prior  to  the  spraying  tends  to  kill  any  germs  that  are  in 
the  milk.  It  is  always  pasteurized  before  it  is  sprayed,  as  the 
keeping  quality  is  increased  by  pasteurization. 

(  The  elimination  of  the  water  and  the  drying  process  of  course 
prevents  the  growth  of  germs.  The  dry  powder  is  no  culture  at 
all  until  it  becomes  liquid  again. 


774 

"  Standing  dry  for  a  time  it  has  been  found  that  the  number 
of  bacteria  decreases  purely  from  lack  of  moisture. 

'  You  can  add  water  to  this  powder,  raise  cream  and  churn 
butter  from  it.  The  enzymes  of  milk  are  very  sensitive  to  heat, 
more  so  than  are  bacteria.  Those  do  not  seem  to  be  affected  by 
the  mere  drying  process.  They  are,  however,  affected  by  pasteuri- 
zation or  sterilization  if  the  temperature  is  raised  too  high. 

"  The  enzyme  is  a  principle  in  milk  that  aids  towards  its  diges- 
tion, something  of  the  same  general  character  as  the  pepsin  in  our 
stomachs,  a  natural  and  wholesome  ferment.  This  powdered  milk 
can  be  re-constituted  that  it  will  be  difficult  to  distinguish  it 
from  un-treated  pasteurized  milk.  In  buying  this  milk,  the  manu- 
facturers of  this  powder  are  in  competition  with  the  regular  milk 
dealers,  cheese  makers  and  condensed  milk  makers.  They  buy  in 
large  quantities  now." 

ICE  CEEAM 

The  manufacture  of  ice  cream  has  become  an  important  industry 
in  the  State.  It  may  well  be  said  that  commercial  ice  cream,  as 
now  produced  and  offered  for  sale,  is  a  food  product  and  a  dairy 
product  assuming  an  important  rank  at  this  time  with  butter, 
cheese  or  other  form  in  which  the  food  value  of  milk  is  made 
available  for  consumption.  In  the  year  1913,  John  Gordon, 
of  Buffalo,  !N".  Y.,  then  an  officer  of  the  Ice  Cream  Makers'  Asso- 
ciation and  directly  engaged  in  the  industry,  made  the  following 
statements  during  the  proceedings  of  the  New  York  State  Dairy- 
men's Association,  in  an  address  to  the  assembled  dairymen : 

The  ice  cream  industry  has  accomplished  three  great 
benefits  for  the  dairy  industry: 

First,  through  the  absorption  of  the  milk  surplus  at  a  time 
when,  if  it  followed  the  old  channels,  the  market  for  dairy 
products  would  be  shattered.  It  has  equalized  the  value  of 
dairy  products,  making  that  valuation  more  uniform  the  year 
round.  The  general  level  of  the  prices  of  dairy  products  has 
been  raised  by  its  influence  and  at  the  same  time  there  has 
been  a  material  reduction  of  the  margin  between  high  and 
low. 

Second,  the  ice  cream  industry  has  rendered  valuable  every 
constituent  part  of  milk,  for  not  only  is  it  an  enormous  user 


775 

of  cream  and  milk,  but  it  also  consumes  enormous  quantities 
of  condensed  milk. 

Third,  by  affording  a  market  for  great  quantities  of  sweet 
cream,  it  is  securing  for  the  whole  dairy  industry  milk  and 
cream  of  better  grade.  It  has  made  it  more  profitable  for  you 
to  keep  cows  and  it  will  make  it  still  more  profitable  in  the 
future.  It  has  made  the  price  for  milk  and  cream  more  uni- 
form the  year  round.  It  has  made  valuable  every  constituent 
part  of  your  whole  milk.  It  has  made  skim  milk  too  valuable 
for  stock  feed. 

The  1900  census  valued  dairy  products  at  $130,783,349; 
in  1909,  they  were  valued  at  $274,551,718,  an  increase  of 
109.9  per  cent.  The  growth  of  the  ice  cream  industry  in 
part  is  responsible  for  this  increase. 

While  there  was  considerably  more  than  one  hundred  and 
fifty  million  gallons  of  ice  cream  manufactured  this  year  in 
the  United  States,  we  will  take  that  as  a  basis  of  figures  show- 
ing the  amount  of  dairy  products  which  the  ice  cream  in- 
dustry uses  annually. 

The  great  bulk  of  commercial  ice  cream  is  made  from  milk, 
cream  and  whole  condensed  milk.  The  milk  and  cream  are 
the  basis  of  the  ice  cream  flavor  and  the  condensed  milk, 
through  its  high  total  solid  content,  provides  body  and  sub- 
stance for  the  ice  cream.  On  the  basis  mentioned,  the  ice 
cream  industry  used  this  year  thirty  million  gallons,  or  two 
hundred  and  fifty  million  pounds  of  cream;  two  hundred 
fifty-five  million  pounds  of  whole  milk,  and  fifteen  million 
gallons,  or  one  hundred  and  thirty-two  million  pounds  of  con- 
densed. The  cream  represents  one  hundred  and  fifty  million 
gallons  of  raw  milk.  The  condensed  represents  forty-five 
million  gallons  of  raw  milk,  and  this  added  to  the  thirty 
million  gallons  of  whole  milk  used  and  mixed  with  the  cream 
and  condensed  makes  a  total  of  two  hundred  and  twenty-five 
million  gallons  of  whole  milk.  Taking  fourteen  cents  as  the 
average  price  paid  per  gallon,  the  ice  cream  industry  paid 
the  producer  of  milk  $31,500,000  for  its  raw  materials  dur- 
ing the  year  1913.  *  *  *  The  census  report  showed  that 


776 

in  1899  there  was  sold  over  two  and  one-quarter  billion 
pounds  of  skim  milk  against  only  three  hundred  and  fifty- 
two  million  pounds  in  1909.  By  another  census,  there  will 
be  scarcely  any  skim  milk  sold.  This  great  decrease  in  the 
amount  of  skim  milk  marketed  is  due  for  a  great  part  to  the 
growth  of  the  condensed  milk  industry  and  to  the  lessening 
number  of  whole  milk  creameries.  *  *  *  In  18 9 9,  there 
was  produced  186,921,787  pounds  of  condensed  and  in  1909, 
there  was  produced  494,796,544  pounds, —  an  increase  of 
307,874,757  pounds,  or  of  164.7  per  cent.  The  value  of  the 
condensed  in  1899  was  close  to  twelve  million  dollars,  while 
in  1909,  it  was  about  $33,500,000, —  almost  treble  in  value. 

We  can  regard  it  of  especial  significance  that  more  than 
half  of  the  condensed  milk  manufactured  in  1909,  or  two 
^hundred  and  eighty  million  pounds,  was  unsweetened  and  it  is 
this  product  which  the  ice  cream  manufacturer  uses  largely. 
*  *  *  New  York  and  Illinois  produced  47.5  per  cent,  of 
the  total  in  1909 ;  Ohio,  Michigan,  Pennsylvania  and  Wis- 
consin accounting  for  the  great  part  of  the  remainder. 

An  approximate  estimate  would  be  that  the  ice  cream  in- 
dustry uses  something  short  of  one^third  of  all  the  condensed 
milk  manufactured  yearly.  *  *  *  The  responsibility  for 
the  correctness  of  the  figures  I  give  you  must  be  divided  be- 
tween the  Ice  Cream  Trade  Journal,  prominent  ice  cream 
manufacturers  with  whom  I  have  talked,  and  myself. 

In  1912,  there  was  fifty  million  invested  in  ice  cream  fac- 
tories and  equipment.  This  figure,  I  am  assured  is  really  a 
low  estimate  and  that  seventy-five  million  is  a  conservative 
figure  for  the  1913  estimate. 

In  1910  census,  the  factory  valuation  of  butter  was  placed 
at  about  $179,500,000.  Figures  that  the  ice  cream  industry 
cauld  gather  would  show  the  factory  valuation  of  its  product 
to  be  about  $100,000,000.  The  ice  cream  industry  must 
carry  an  enormous  overhead  charge  the  year  round  and  yet 
do  a  paying  business  for  only  five  months.  I  feel  that  the  ice 
cream  manufacturer  who  is  making  10  per  cent,  year  in  and 
year  out  on  his  whole  factory  proposition  is  on  an  excellent 
footing.  *  *  * 


777 

In  addition  to  the  $31,500,000  which  the  ice  cream  in- 
dustry paid  the  producer  for  the  raw  materials,  it  had  to  pay 
the  creamery  and  condensery  a  handsome  profit  for  assemb- 
ling the  whole  milk  and  turning  the  greatest  part  of  it  into 
condensed  milk  and  cream. 

The  average  consumer  probably  realizes  that  ice  cream  is 
a  substantial  food,  the  justification  of  which  belief  is  attested 
by  the  fact  that  commercial  ice  cream  contains  over  30  per 
cent  total  solids.  *  "  The  ice  cream  manufacturers  know 
what  the  public  wants.  It  does  not  want  an  over-rich  product 
because  they  cannot  eat  enough  of  it.  If  the  public  wanted 
a  high  butter  fat  content  ice  cream,  then  the  manufacturers 
of  a  medium  butter  fat  content  product,  now  generally  f bimd 
on  the  market,  would  be  in  the  minority.  *  *  *  When  the 
ice  cream  man  cuts  his  butter  fat  content,  he  adds  condensed, 
and  one  is  about  as  valuable  as  the  other.  If  anything,  con- 
densed is  more  valuable  because  it  allows  the  use  of  all  the 
milk." 

The  Committee  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  statements  of  Mr. 
Gordon  being  in  the  nature  of  an  admission  against  interest,  so  far 
as  it  applies  to  the  producer,  were  fairly  accurate  for  the  years  in 
question.  The  value  of  skim  milk  that  went  into  ice  cream 
products  represented  many  millions  of  dollars  and  has  (Con- 
tinued to  represent  many  millions  of  dollars  in  value,  which  the 
consumer  paid  each  year  down  to  this  date.  It  is  not  difficult, 
however,  to  establish  the  fact  that  the  producers,  of  milk  in  the 
State  of  New  York  received  relatively  no  fair  return  for  skim 
milk  at  the  creameries  during  those  years  for  the  increased  value 
of  milk  that  resulted  from  this  large  market  for  the  skim  milk. 
The  evidence  before  this  Committee  justifies  the  conclusion  that 
more  than  one-half  of  the  constituent  parts  of  the  commercial  ice 
cream  is  made  from  condensed  skim  milk.  The  dairyman  who 
brought  his  milk  to  the  creamery  engaged  in  manufacturing  the 
condensed  skim  milk  for  the  ice  cream  man  delivered  a  product 
which  had  two  substantial  elements  of  value.  First,  the  cream  to 
be  removed  from  it  in  the  form  of  butter  fat  and  sold  as  such. 
Second,  the  skim  milk  to  be  removed  from  it,  turned  into  con- 


778 

densed  milk  and  sold  to  the  ice  cream  manufacturer.  Neverthe- 
less, the  evidence  before  this  Committee  shows  for  a  type  instance 
that  the  Horseheads  Creamery  Company  in  July,  1916,  exten- 
sively engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  condensed  skim  milk  or 
partially  skim  condensed  milk,  paid  to  the  dairymen  who  brought 
their  product  to  the  plant  for  the  butter  fat,  a  June  price  approxi- 
mating 29  cents  per  pound. 

Nothing  whatever  was  paid  to  the  dairymen  for  the  re- 
sulting skim  milk  which  was  promptly  manufactured  into 
condensed  milk  and  sold  to  the  ice  cream  manufacturer.  It 
enabled  the  Horseheads  Creamery  Company  and  many  others 
similarly  operated,  to  supply  the  ice  cream  man  with  con- 
densed skim  milk,  or  so-called  "  half  and  half,"  at  a  low  price, 
and  that  in  turn  enabled  the  commercial  ice  cream  man  to  monu- 
f acture  and  sell  his  product  to  the  consumer  at  a  low  price.  Both 
the  Creamery  Company  and  the  ice  cream  man  were  in  a  position 
to  make  substantial  profit.  There  was  a  large  demand  for  both 
their  products.  In  order  to  supply  this  demand  they  needed  and 
bought  the  dairymen's  milk  on  the  butter  fat  basis  and  at  a  low 
price,  but  it  is  obvious  that  the  dairymen  got  no  return  whatsoever 
because  of  the  increased  demand  for  his  product.  The  burdens 
imposed  upon  him  and  which  are  heretofore  set  out  in  this  report, 
were  in  nowise  lightened  or  affected  by  the  large  consumption  of 
milk  solids  in  the  form  of  ice  cream.  Despite  the  assertion  of 
Mr.  Gordon,  "  it  has  made  skim  milk  too  valuable  for  stock  feed," 
the  dairymen  throughout  the  State  were  still  turning  over  to  the 
creamery  men  this  product  on  a  stock  feed  basis.  Everybody  ex- 
cept the  dairyman  was  making  something  on  the  transaction  and 
the  ice  cream  man  modestly  stated  that  he  would  be  satisfied  with 
a  10  per  cent,  profit,  but  the  dairyman  was  not  considered  at  all. 

ICE  CREAM  MADE  FROM  SKIM  MILK  SOLIDS 

The  use  of  milk  from  which  the  butter  fat  has  been  taken  in  the 
manufacture  of  ice  cream,  in  the  judgment  of  this  Committee,  is 
wholly  justified  and  beneficial  both  to  the  dairy  industry  and  the 
consumer,  always  providing  that  the  dairymen's  needs  are  con- 
sidered and  he  is  permitted  to  receive  the  market  value  for  his 


779 

product.  Manufacturers  early  discovered  that  no  better  substi- 
tutes could  be  use  to  build  up  the  body  of  ice  cream  than  the 
natural  milk  solids.  All  persons  who  have  studied  food  values 
agree  that  these  milk  solids,  exclusive  of  butter  fat,  are  a  very 
valuable  and  readily  available  form  of  food.  There  is  no  other 
food  substance  in  daily  use  that  can  be  procured  at  the  same  price 
having  a  greater  food  value  than  these  so-called  skim  milk  solids, 
or  milk  solids  other  than  fat.  At  first  glance,  it  may  sug- 
gest itself  that  the  use  of  extensive  quantities  of  these 
solids  in  the  manufacture  of  ice  cream  were  injurious  to  the 
dairymen  in  that  they  were  a  substitute  for  butter  fat, 
but  we  believe  a  further  consideration  of  the  proposition 
will  lead  to  a  different  conclusion.  Ice  cream  made  wholly 
or  largely  of  cream  or  butter  fat  must  necessarily  command  a  price 
far  in  advance  of  the  present  prices  at  which  commercial  ice  cream 
is  sold. 

The  modern  commercial  ice  cream,  if  properly  made  out 
of  skim  milk  solids,  has  become  and  is,  a  useful  article  for  daily 
consumption.  There  is  no  food  substance  so  desirable  for  use 
as  the  milk  solids  from  which  the  butter  fat  has  been  taken. 
They  are  most  wholesome  and  nutritious.  No  desirable  substitute 
suggests  itself.  The  use  and  constantly  increasing  use  of  the  milk 
solids  for  this  purpose  should,  and  must  necessarily,  when  the  sub- 
ject is  fully  understood,  add  greatly  to  the  value  of  the  dairy- 
men's product.  It  only  remains  for  the  dairymen  to  thoroughly 
understand  the  question  to  ascertain  the  market  value  and  there- 
after secure  for  himself  a  portion  of  the  increased  value  which  his 
product  has,  which  up  to  this  time  he  has  failed  to  do.  If  thereby 
the  consumer  pays  a  slight  advance  for  the  commercial  ice  cream, 
he  is  in  no  way  injured,  or  if  the  ice  cream  man's  profits  are  re- 
duced to  something  below  10  per  cent.,  he  can  still  well  afford  to 
continue  in  the  business,  because  capital  is  satisfied  with  a  less  net 
return.  In  order  to  promote  and  encourage  the  dairy  industry  in 
the  State  these  profits  should  be  shared  to  some  extent  with  the 
dairymen. 


780 

UNJUSTIFIED  FEAR  OF  THE  ICE  CREAM  MANUFACTURER 

In  examining  into  this  subject  throughout  the  State,  the  Com- 
mittee has  found  the  commercial  ice  cream  manufacturer  timid 
and  frightened  lest  it  should  l>e  made  known  to  his  customers  that 
the  body  of  his  product  was  built  up  of  milk  solids  other  than 
butter  fat.  In  other  words,  he  has  been  fearful  to  have  it  dis- 
closed that  it  was  made  largely  out  of  condensed  skim  milk.  This 
fear,  we  believe,  is  entirely  unjustified.  We  think  no  greater  ad- 
vantage should  come  to  the  industry  as  a  whole  than  to  make  it 
public  and  to  publicly  advertise  in  the  papers  that  the  products 
which  is  being  sold  to  the  consumer  at  from  55  to  85  cents  per 
gallon,  were  largely  built  up  of  .milk  solids  other  than  butter  fat. 
The  consumer  must  eventually  know,  and  has  the  right  to  know, 
what  substances  are  used  to  make  the  body  of  the  product  that  is 
being  used  more  and  more  in  the  household  and  for  children.  He 
must  know,  unless  the  retail  dealer  successfully  conceals  it  by 
charging  an  exorbitant  price,  that  it  could  not  be  made  from  cream. 
The  consumer  also  could  readily  be  made  to  understand  that  no 
more  wholesome  or  safe  product  could  be  used  either  for  adults  or 
children  than  the  milk  solids  which  are  being  actually  used.  It 
will,  therefore,  be  seen  that  there  is  no  sound  reason  why  the  so- 
called  "  skim  condensed  "  should  not  be  widely  advertised  as  the 
substance  which  practically  makes  the  lx)dy  of  the  average  com- 
mercial ice  cream.  That  fact  being  well  established,  everybody 
of  ordinary  intelligence  will  concede  that  the  product  is  one  highly 
to  be  desired  as  food  and  entirely  safe  and  beneficial  for  family 
use.  We  are  of  the  opinion  that  past  beliefs,  attitudes  and  prac- 
tices of  the  ice  cream  manufacturer  on  this  point  are  not  justified 
and  not  beneficial  to  the  business. 

USE  OF  FRAUDULENT  DYE-STUFFS 

Believing  that  it  was  necessary  to  convince  the  public  that  the 
so-called  commercial  ice  cream  was  really  made  of  cream,  many 
manufacturers  of  commercial  ice  cream  have  been  induced  to  adopt 
practices  which  are  believed  to  be  unwholesome  and  injurious  to 
the  public  health.  Assuming  that  the  public  must  be  allowed  to 
believe  that  ice  cream  was  really  made  from  cream,  a  large  num- 


781 

ber  of  manufacturers  of  the  commercial  product  have  constantly 
dyed,  or,  as  one  manufacturer  described  it,  "  painted,"  the  "whole- 
some white  milk  solids  with  coal  tar  dyes. 

The  dye-stuff  salesman,  looking  for  a  market,  readily  created 
his  "  buttercup  yellow "  which  he  sells  to  the  commercial  ice 
cream  man  at  prices  ranging  from  $6  to  $15  per  pound.  These 
he  induced  the  ice  cream  manufacturer  to  use.  The  result  is  that 
a  perfectly  wholesome  article  of  food  is  adulterated,  with  what 
many  people  regard  as  a  mild  poison,  in  order  to  deceive  the  eye 
and  allow  the  consumer  to  believe  that  he  was  buying  at  75  cents 
a  gallon  ice  cream  made  of  butter  fat.  It  is  very  doubtful  if 
ice  cream  made  entirely  of  butter  fat  would  be  more  wholesome 
or  more  desirable  as  food  than  ice  cream  made  very  largely  of  skim 
milk  solids  with  a  due  proportion  of  butter  fat ;  at  least,  the  prod- 
uct manufactured  largely  from  naked  milk  solids  was  desirable 
as  a  food  product  and  equally  wholesome.  It  does  not  become  at 
all  unwholesome  until  the  dyeing  process  enters  in,  when  its  use 
becomes  at  once  questionable. 

USE  OF  DYE-STUFFS  IN  FOOD 

There  can  be  no  necessary  use  for  mineral  dye  stuffs  of  any 
kind  in  any  food  product.  The  dye  stuff  dealer  .arid  the  ice  cream 
man  answer,  "  Our  buttercup  yellow  is  certified  to  be  lawful  for 
use  in  food  stuffs  by  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture 
and  therefore  we  are  justified  in  using  it."  This  means  that  but- 
tercup yellow  and  other  similar  preparations  are  "  certified  "  by 
the  United  States  Department  to  be  permitted  to  be  used.  It 
must  be  remembered  that  the  department  has  never  certified  that 
they  are  wholesome  or  healthful.  The  utmost  that  any  disinter- 
ested person  has  ever  asserted  as  to  the  use  of  such  products,  is 
that  their  unwholesomeness  or  the  possible  injurious  effects  of  some 
of  them  have  never  been  established.  That  they  are  beneficial  to 
health  is  claimed  by  none  competent  to  speak.  That  they  are  all 
positively  harmful,  whether  certified  or  uncertified,  is  claimed  by 
many.  They  are  invariably  used  to  deceive  the  purchaser  and  for 
no  other  purpose  whatsoever.  Their  use  in  food  stuffs  is  contrary 


to  good  practice  and  the  public  health  and  should  be  absolutely 
prohibited  by  law.  In  reference  to  this  matter  a  decision  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals  of  this  State  may  have  an  important  bearing. 

DECISION  IN  THE  VINEGAR  CASE 

In  the  case  of  People  v.  Gerard,  145  1ST.  Y.  106-110,  the  Court 
of  Appeals  of  this  State  in  substance  held : 

"  Adding  a  foreign  and  artificial  ingredient  to  a  food  prod- 
uct, even  for  the  purposes  of  color  merely,  is  in  effect  an 
adulteration  and  the  Legislature  has  the  power  absolutely  to 
prohibit  it." 

Chapter  515  of  the  Laws  of  1889,  provide: 

"  No  person  shall  manufacture,  produce,  sell  or  keep  for 
sale,  any  vinegar  which  shall  contain  any  preparation  injuri- 
ous to  health,  or  any  artificial  coloring  matter." 

Justice  Finch,  writing  the  prevailing  opinion,  says: 

"  It  is  evident  that  the  last  clause  has  relation  to  the  pre- 
vention of  fraud,  not  only  because  of  the  form  and  mode  of 
expression,  but  also  because  if  limited  to  an  effect  upon  the 
public  health,  it  would  become  a  mere  useless  repetition.  Any 
ingredient  so  injurious  had  already  been  prohibited  and  the 
further  limitation  must  be  assumed  to  have  a  further  purpose 
and  relate  to  the  prevention  of  fraud  in  the  production  and 
sale  of  vinegar.  *  *  *  The  prohibition  is  against  the  fraud 
of  a  false  color.  *  *  *  The  greed  of  profit  which  has  adul- 
terated or  disguised  almost  every  article  of  food,  led  to  the 
devise  of  coloring  so  as  to  change  its  appearance  from  almost 
white  to  a  brown  or  amber  color.  *  *  *  Thus  changed  the 
new  product  might  easily  deceive  purchasers. 

Obviously  the  artificial  coloring  matter  is  used  for  some 
purpose.  It  adds  to  the  cost  and  labor  of  preparation  and 
such  expense  would  not  be  incurred  unless  it  improved  the 
saleable  quality  of  the  article.  The  coloring  mattur  does  not 
affect  the  taste  or  actual  quality  of  the  vinegar  when  as  here 
it  is  brown  sugar  or  caramel  that  is  used,  but  it  does  change 
the  appearance.  It  masks  the  truth;  it  effects  a  disguise;  it 


783 

naturally  deceives  and  is  intended  to  deceive  for  the  new 
color  is  that  of  cider  vinegar  and  enables  the  substituted 
product  to  be  foisted  upon  those  who  might  prefer  and  seek 
the  old.  It  is  apparent  that  the  vinegar  was  colored  for  the 
purposes  of  deception  and  to  divert  the  buyer. 

The  Legislature  had  a  right  to  forbid  that  device  and  put 
a  stop  to  the  fraud.  They  might  forbid  specially  the  use  of 
the  coloring  matter  creating  a  resemblance  to  cider  vinegar, 
or  accomplish  the  same  purpose  by  forbidding  the  use  of  any 
coloring  whatever.  The  Legislature  might  make  the  prohibi- 
tion absolute  for  two  reasons :  One,  the  difficulty  of  enforc- 
ing a  special  provision  limited  narrowly  to  an  imitation  with 
intent  to  deceive,  in  which  event  there  would  always  be  a 
question  of  fact  more  or  less  hampering  the  effective  execu- 
tion of  the  law;  and  the  other  that  in  tampering  with  food 
products  which  adds  ingredients  not  natural  or  essential  is 
fraught  with  danger  to  the  public  health,  or  at  least  involves 
the  intent  and  result  of  a  fraud  upon  the  community.  Food 
should  be  pure,  absolutely  and  unquestionably  pure.  No  tricks 
should  be  played  with  it.  The  Legislature  may  resolutely 
protect  it.  No  artificial  color  can  ever  be  added  to  distilled 
vinegar  for  any  good  or  honest  purpose  that  I  can  imagine. 
In  so  serious  a  matter  as  the  absolute  purity  of  food,  we  ought 
not  to  say  that  a  general  law  which  simply  compels  that 
absolute  purity  is  beyond  the  power  of  the  Legislature.  There 
can  be  no  vested  right  to  deceive  the  public. 

(People  v.  Gerard,  145  K  Y.  106-110.) 

Conclusion 

When  the  illuminating  reasoning  of  Justice  Finch  is  ap- 
plied to  the  use  of  "  certified  "  coal  tar  dyes  in  food  products  of 
any  kind,  there  would  seem  to  be  no  reason  why  the  Legislature 
of  the  State  of  New  York  should  not,  by  an  absolute  general  law, 
prevent  the  "  playing  of  tricks  "  upon  the  consumers  of  this  State 
in  the  future.  Either  such  an  act  should  be  passed,  or  in  the  event 
of  the  creation  of  a  commission  having  charge  and  control  of  the 
supply  of  food  stuffs  in  the  State,  such  commission  should  be  un- 


784 

questionably  empowered  to  prohibit  by  order  the  use  of  coal  tar 
dyes  in  any  form  in  any  food  products  sold  in  this  State,  to  the 
end  that  the  food  supplied  to  the  people  of  this  State  should  com- 
ply with  the  requirements  of  the  opinion  above  quoted  and  be 
"  absolutely  and  unquestionably  pure.77 

CONCENTBATED   COMMERCIAL   FEEDING    STUFFS 

A  wide  field  for  fraudulent  operation  exists  in  the  selling  of 
concentrated  feeding  stuffs  to  the  dairymen  of  this  State.  For 
many  years  past  the  dairymen  of  this  State  have  found  it  neces- 
sary to  bring  to  the  dairy  farms  large  quantities  of  grain  feedsr 
which  they  bought  of  feed  dealers  scattered  throughout  the  State. 
A  widespread  propaganda  was  instituted  by  various  means  to  show 
to  a  dairyman  of  the  State  the  value  of  different  sorts  of  concen- 
trated feeds.  '  They  were  understood  to  furnish  the  dairymen  with 
stock  food  in  concentrated  form  that  his  farm  did  not  produce  and 
at  a  less  price  than  he  was  able  to  produce  them.  Of.  course, 
the  dairyman  understood  the  nse  of  bran  and  middlings 
and  he  rapidly  learned  the  food  value  of  cottonseed  meal,  distillers 
grain,  gluten,  and  the  so-called  molasses  by-product  from  the  sugar 
refinery.  All  these  had  a  food  value  and  the  market  furnished  an 
abundant  supply.  These  by-products  were  purchased  at  a  less  cost 
than  the  dairyman  could  produce  natural  grains  for  stock.  But 
the  field  was  too  attractive  to  be  permitted  to  be  occupied  exclu- 
sively by  legitimate  business.  Abundant  opportunities  for  large 
profits  were  disclosed  to  the  type  which  is  not  satisfied  with  legiti- 
mate profits  in  merchandizing  sound  goods  at  their  actual  value. 
Many  gentlemen  conceived  the  idea  that  by  putting  on  the  market 
concentrated  dairy  foods  consisting  of  various  ingredients  or  al- 
leged ingredients  useful  for  cattle  feed,  that  large  profits  might  be 
made  by  adulterating  those  feeds  with  inferior  or  worthless 
articles. 

The  idea  was  followed  by  prompt  and  effective  action.  The 
consequence  has  been  that  the  dairy  sections  of  the  State  were  and 
are  flooded  with  branded  mixed  dairy  foods,  a  great  number  of 
which  are  shown  upon  analysis  to  contain  a  large  amount  of  worth- 
less material  and  are  a  fraud  upon  the  dairyman  who  buys  them. 
If  the  sales  of  fraudulent  patent  medicine  can  be  designated  as  the 


785 

great  American  fraud,  the  sales  of  these  concentrated  commercial 
feeding  stuffs  may  well  be  branded  as  the  great  dairyman's  fraud. 
It  is  not  going  too  far  to  assert  that  many  thousands  of  dollars  are 
yearly  paid  out  by  the  dairymen  of  the  State  of  New  York  for 
dirt,  dust,  straw  and  rubbish,  permitted  to  be  sold  under  some 
high-sounding  name  as  a  valuable  cattle  food,  sure  to  increase  the 
production  of  his  dairy.  An  examination  of  the  records  of  the 
Department  of  Agriculture  and  of  the  ~New  York  State  Experi- 
ment Station  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  almost  everything:  is  used 
in  these  feeds,  the  nature  of  which  can  be  successfully  concealed. 

The  present  provisions  of  the  Agricultural  Law  requiring  that 
the  bag  be  marked  with  the  protein  and  fibre  contents,  etc.,  is  in- 
effectual to  prevent  the  successful  operation  of  this  fraud. 

HENRY  M.  WHITBECK  of  Lockport,  N".  Y.,  being  called  before 

the  Committee,  testified : 

"  I  am  a  manufacturer  of  flour  and  operate  the  Thompson 
Milling  Company  and  the  Federal  Milling  Company  in  Lockport. 
Our  business  is  to  manufacture  wheat  into  flour.  We  sell  our  bran 
and  middlings  to  the  dairymen  as  dairy  feed  and  in  no  other  form. 
I  know  something  about  the  compounding  of  dairy  foods  by 
specialists  whereby  they  take  a  little  bran,  a  little  middlings,  and 
oat  hulls,  and  elevator  dust,  and  molasses,  and  make  a  special  brand 
of  high-class  milk  producing  feed  apparently  of  very  inferior  ma- 
terials. I  have  been  urged  to  go  in  the  manufacture  of  that  class 
of  feeds,  but  I  have  had  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Naturally,  if  the 
inferior  materials  can  be  combined  and  covered  up  and  sold  for 
a  high  price  to  the  dairyman  as  a  specially  balanced  ration  war- 
ranted to  produce  a  high  flow  of  milk,  there  will  be  a  great  deal  of 
profit.  But  we  sold  only  the  middlings  and  bran  for  just  what 
they  are.  I  have  had  these  machinery  men  come  here  and  urge 
us  to  go  in  the  manufacture  of  those  goods,  and  they  would  have  a 
formula  showing  so  much  screenings,  oat  hulls,  smut  dust,  peanut 
shucks,  and  other  stuff  at  a  profit  of  $5  per  ton;  but  we  haven't 
the  room  or  time.  We  have  our  hands  full  with  the  flour  business." 

WHITMAN  H.  JORDAN,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 
"  I  am  director  of  the  New  York  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion.    I  think  perhaps  my  testimony  would  be  most  useful  in  re- 


786 

gard  to  the  cattle  food  trade  in  this  State.  One  of  the  prominent 
characteristics  of  the  cattle  food  trade  in  recent  years  has  been  the 
introduction  of  by-products  that  formerly  were  cast  aside  as  of 
little  value.  These  by-products  include  ground  corn  cobs,  oat  hulls 
and  screenings  from  wheat  and  other  grain.  When  I  say  oat  hulls, 
I  might  include  oat  clippings  in  the  list  and  these  have  been  intro- 
duced into  the  so-called  compounded  feeds  very  freely.  So  that 
with  the  majority  of  the  brands  of  feeds  sold  in  this  State,  proprie- 
tary brands  contain  one  or  more  of  these  inferior  ingredients,  oat 
hulls,  oat  clippings,  screenings,  and  ground  corn  cobs.  Here  is  a 
dairy  feed  with  molasses.  You  will  find  several  of  these,  but  here 
is  a  particular  one.  It  is  guaranteed  to  contain  16.5  per  cent, 
protein;  3.5  per  cent,  of  fat,  and  the  maximum  of  12  per  cent,  of 
fibre.  The  law  requires  that  the  maximum  fibre  should  be  guar- 
anteed because  an  increase  of  fibre,  crude  fibre,  decreases  digesti- 
bility, and  crude  fibre  is  a  common  constituent  of  the  most  of  those 
inferior  ingredients  like  oat  hulls  and  corn  cobs,  so  that  the  object 
of  the  law  is  to  require  of  the  manufacturer  a  statement 
that  the  fibre  shall  not  go  beyond  a  certain  per  cent.,  and 
he  is  to  hold  to  that  that  guarantee  through  inspection  by 
the  State  Department  of  Agriculture.  Now,  the  ingredients 
of  those  feeds  were  cottonseed  meal,  corn,  gluten  feed,  oat 
clippings,  20  per  cent,  in  that  feed,  ground  and  bolted  grain 
screenings,  35  per  cent.  There  is  55  per  cent,  of  inferior 
material.  A  portion  of  the  screenings  may  be  of  value,  but 
screenings  vary  from  year  to  year  in  weed  seeds,  in  dirt,  or 
corn,  gluten  feed,  oat  clippings,  20  per  cent,  in  that  feed,  ground 
and  bolted  grain  screenings,  35  per  cent.  There  is  55  per  cent,  of 
inferior  material.  A  portion  of  the  screenings  may  be  of  value, 
but  screenings  vary  from  year  to  year  in  weed  seeds,  in  dirt,  or 
other  not  standard  things  so  you  cannot  place  any  definite  value  on 
material  of  that  kind.  The  price  of  this  particular  feed  is  not 
stated,  but  a  feed  containing  the  same  ingredients  and  guaranteed 
analysis  was  sold  in  Pennsylvania  in  1914  for  from  $25  to  $29  per 
ton,  the  average  selling  price  being  $26.74.  Nearly  50  per  cent, 
of  that  money  was  lost.  No.  2,  wet  bran  with  ground  screenings, 
ground  corn  cob,  30  per  cent.,  and  the  selling  price  was  $28  per 
ton.  Food  No.  3  had  a  trace  of  cottonseed  meal,  puffed  rice, 


787 

ground  puffed  wheat,  oat  meal  mill  by-products,  oat  hulls,  oat 
shorts,  oat  middlings,  unquestionably  chiefly  hulls,  and  the  selling 
price  of  that  was  $30  to  $32  per  ton.  Feed  No.  4,  alfalfa  meal, 
cracked  corn,  crushed  oats,  cottonseed  meal,  oat  meal  mill  by- 
products, or  hulls,  oat  shorts,  oat  middlings,  molasses,  selling  price, 
$33  to  $34  a  ton.  This  may  be  an  indictment  of  the  feeding  stuffs 
trade,  but  there  is  no  sort  of  question  that  there  are  protein  mix- 
tures with  the  standard  things  in,  that  are  made  in  order  to  cover 
them  up  and  sell  them  at  prices  which  they  otherwise  could  not 
get  for  that  sort  of  inferior  material.  There  is  no  question  about 
that.  And  while  it  is  all  right  for  the  farmer  to  feed  those  things, 
if  he  knows  what  he  is  feeding,  he  should  not  pay  grain  prices  for 
them ;  that  is,  the  price  of  standard  feeds,  like  gluten,  bran  or  corn 
meal,  linseed  meal  or  cottonseed  meal,  or  feeds  of  that  class.  They 
have  nothing  covered  up  in  them  and  should  be  bought  in  their 
natural  state. 

"  As  to  this  alfalfa  meal,  I  wish  to  make  a  remark  about  that. 
Alfalfa  is  a  feeding  stuff  that  has  come  to  have  a  perspective  in  the 
mind  of  the  agricultural  public  altogether  too  much  enlarged. 
These  alfalfa  hulls  are  worth  no  more  than  first-class  clover  hay. 
At  the  same  time  the  feed  men  are  having  this  alfalfa  ground  and 
selling  it  to  our  farmers  in  these  mixtures  at  $25  to  $30  per  ton, 
and  yet  even  this  alfalfa  is  better  than  a  whole  lot  of  things  that 
are  used  in  them.  The  up-shot  of  the  whole  thing  is  that  the  dairy- 
men should  avoid  these  prepared  feeds  and  feed  straight  grain. 
We  have  preached  that  from  the  platform  for  many  years.  I  can- 
not understand  how  these  people  are  selling  hundreds  of  dollars 
worth  of  this  worthless  stuff  every  day. 

The  molasses  foods  have  lent  themselves  to  this  sort  of  mixing 
because  the  molasses  obscures  the  mixture  and  so  they  have  been 
mixing  more  and  more  of  that  sort  of  inferior  materials  in  mo- 
lasses feeds  than  everything  else.  We  issue  a  bulletin  every  year 
giving  the  ingredients  and  we  have  warned  the  farmers  that  oat 
hulls  have  low  digestibility,  between  30  and  40  per  cent.  At  first, 
we  informed  them  against  weed  seeds  because  we  discovered  that 
the  weed  seed  would  germinate,  but  the  warnings  were  insufficient 
because  the  manufacturers  immediately  cooked  them  or  changed 
the  name.  Refuse  oats  by-product  is  worthless  as  a  food.  It  has  no 


788 

more  value  than  tlie  straw  refuse  around  the  barn.  The  manu- 
facturer under  the  present  law  can  put  anything  he  wants  to  into 
these  feeds.  He  only  has  to  hold  it  up  to  his  guarantee  as  to  pro- 
tein, etc.  All  he  has  got  to  do  is  to  keep  up  to  what  he  said  he 
would  put  in  it  of  those  substances.  All  this  compounded  food  is 
being  sold  at  a  price  relatively  higher  than  the  market  value  of 
tne  ground  grains.  It  is  generally  sold  at  the  price  of  sound  .grains 
plus  the  charge  for  mixing.  The  farmer  can  buy  the  clear  grains 
and  mix  himself  cheaper  than  the  miller  can." 

The  Committee  has  found  that  the  grain  elevators  in  Buffalo 
are  swept  regularly  and  the  dirt  and  debris  collected.  This  dirt 
and  debris  is  in  turn  sold  to  the  manufacturers  of  these  fraudulent 
feeds,  who,  in  turn,  sell  it  to  the  dairymen  plus  a  charge  for  mix- 
ing at  -a  price  nearly  equivalent  to  the  price  of  the  grain  that  was 
stored  in  these  elevators.  Upon  analysis,  this  dust  may  show  that 
it  has  accumulated  a  part  of  the  protein  from  the  grain  stored  in 
the  elevator  and  may  yield  a  percentage  of  protein  on  a  test,  but 
many  hundreds  of  pounds  of  dirt  whicb  yield  nothing  is  sold 
with  it  M  the  same  price.  Oat  hulls  are  straw  and  nothing  else. 
The  fanner  has  an  abundance  of  it  about  his  barn,  yet  many  thou- 
sands of  tons  of  the  same  straw  are  sold  by  the  concentrated  feed 
sands  of  tons  of  the  same  straw  is  sold  by  the  concentrated  feed 
men  back  to  the  farmers  under  the  disguise  of  a  dairy  food  mixed 
and  colored  with  molasses.  This  is  a  most  -excellent  and  thriving 
business.  It  brings  large  profits  to  those  engaged  in  it  and  it  is 
very  evident  that  out  of  the  large  profits  resulting  from  this  frau- 
dulent business,  strenuous  opposition  will  be  made  to  any  action 
on  the  part  of  the  State  that  will  effectually  prevent  the  dairymen 
from  being  further  defrauded  and  imposed  upon.  Strong  reasons 
will  be  urged  before  the  Legislature  why  the  traffic  should  not  be 
interfered  with.  The  sound  underlying  reason  for  the  activity  of 
these  gentlemen  will  be  that  the  business  of  defrauding  the  dairy- 
men is  too  profitable  to  be  interfered  with  by  an  effective  law. 

This  State  has  attempted  to  protect  the  dairymen  but  has 
not  succeeded.  Thousands  of  samples  of  grain  are  analyzed 
yearly  at  the  Experiment  Station.  The  samples  are  taken  from 
the  stores  of  grain  dealers.  The  record  shows  that  very  many  of 
these  samples  consist  in  part  of  highly  fraudulent  materials.  By 


789 

the  time  the  sample  reaches  the  Experiment  Station  and  is  ana- 
lyzed and  its  fraudulent  character  established  thousands  of  dollars 
have  heen  taken  from  the  dairymen  in  payment  for  the  staff. 
Thus,  the  State  demonstrates  by  its  own  work,  that  the  law  is 
ineffective  in  preventing  fraud,  and  when  the  fraudulent  character 
of  an  article  is  established,  it  simply  re-appears  under  a  new  name 
and  with  a  still  higher  guarantee;  of  its  milk  producing  quality.  It 
is  a  confusion  of  weakness  that  fraud  should  so  easily  nourish  in 
the  State  and  victimize  a  class  of  producers  already  burdened  with 
the  necessary  costs  of  the  industry.  It  seems  hardly  possible  that 
it  could  have  been  permitted  to  grow  to  its  present  extent.  It 
seems  unnecessary  to  say  that  such  laws  should  be  passed  as  would 
protect  the  dairymen  and  prevent  further  operations  of  this  kind, 
although,  as  above  suggested,  such  a  proposed  law  Tvill  meet  with 
bitter  opposition  from  those  engaged  in  the  traffic.  This  opposi- 
tion will  naturally  arise  from  the  fear  of  losing  the  great  profits 
which  have  resulted  from  these  fraudulent  practices. 

In  the  judgment  of  the  Committee,  it  is  no  sufficient  an- 
swer to  this  proposition  to  say  that  the  dairyman  should 
protect  himself  from  these  frauds.  It  is  self-evident  that 
he  has  not  and  does  not  protect  himself.  It  is  very  doubt- 
ful if  any  class  of  men  similarly  situated  without  the  ef- 
fective action  of  the  State  could  protect  themselves.  It  is  doubt- 
ful if  the  present  branding  on  the  bag  required  by  the  State,  does 
not  aid  in  the  perpetration  of  the  fraud  in  that  without  much 
regard  to  the  meaning  of  the  scientific  terms,  the  indifferent  and 
careless  dairyman  is  not  led  to  believe  that  in  some  way  the  De- 
partment of  Agriculture  guarantees  the  fraudulent  dairy  food  to 
be  useful  and  valuable.  This  again  suggests  that  a  competent  and 
active  department  clothed  with  power  and  means  to  promptly  reach 
these  fraudulent  practices  should  be  created. 

RETAIL  FEED  DEALERS'  ASSOCIATION 

The  foregoing  discussion  naturally  lends  itself  to  a  report  on 
the  activities  of  a  certain  group  of  retail  feed  dealers  in  the  State 
who  have  banded  themselves  together  into  an  association  or  many 
associations,  known  as  Feed  Dealers'  Associations,  but  having  a 
common  purpose  and  end.  This  end  can  possibly  be  described  as 


790 

a  means  to  prevent  the  dairymen  of  the  State  buying  cattle  food 
of  any  type  or  kind  except  through  and  by  means  of  a  designated 
dealer  in  each  community  whose  practices  and  methods  should  be 
satisfactory  to  the  State  Association.  An  examination  of  the 
record  of  these  feed  dealers'  associations  disclose  the  most  abhor- 
ent  and  immoral  practices,  aims  and  methods.  They  sought  by  a 
system  of  blacklisting,  to  frighten  and  terrorize  all  millers  and 
wholesale  dealers  in  grain,  from  dealing  in  any  way  with  the  local 
grange,  a  co-operative  society  or  an  individual  dairyman.  The 
organization  was  intended  to  be  a  very  live  one  and  to  keep  in  con- 
stant daily  touch  with  the  business  of  all  feed  dealers  in  the  State 
and  with  the  private  business  of  every  dairyman  in  the  State,  and 
of  every  co-operative  society  or  dairyman's  society  or  grange. 
They  also  traced  every  car  shipment  where  possible  to  the  dairy- 
man, grange  or  co-operative  society,  to  ascertain  what  jobber, 
dealer  or  miller  had  sold  the  same.  Having  located  the  seller,  he 
as  approached  repeatedly,  first  by  mild  suggestions,  then  by  darker 
hints,  to  the  effect  that  the  association  would  prevent  the  handling 
of  his  products  by  any  grain  dealers  in  the  Eastern  States,  unless 
he  forthwith  discontinued  the  selling  of  his  product  in  wholesale 
quantities  to  any  person,  except  those  designated  by  the  Associa- 
tion. Even  general  store  keepers  were  prohibited  from  buying 
grain  for  neighboring  dairymen. 

The  Borden  Company  at  one  time  undertook  to  supply 
the  dairymen  in  its  neighborhood  with  grain  at  wholesale 
prices,  but  this  movement  was  effectually  blocked  by  threats 
of  trouble  made  to  the  company  through  this  association. 
The  membership  of  the  association  was  relatively  unimportant; 
in  fact,  if  it  had  assembled  every  retail  grain  dealer  in  the  State 
of  New  York,  its  membership  and  capital  investment  would  still 
have  been  insignificant,  and  yet  its  methods  were  singularly  effec- 
tive; so  effective,  that  the  Committee  finds  it  difficult  to  believe 
that  its  methods  were  not  prompted,  and  its  purposes  aided,  by  the 
larger  and  more  sinister  associations  engaged  in  the  manufacture 
and  distribution  of  fraudulent  feed  stuffs,  which  are  more  particu- 
larly described  heretofore.  '  It  was  disclosed  that  the  State  Asso- 
ciation was  in  receipt  of  some  moneys  from  the  agents  of  the 
manufacturing  and  distributing  concerns.  To  what  extent  funds 


791 

were  furnished  and  assistance  given  from  the  manufacturers  or 
distributors  to  this  association,  the  Committee  is  not  able  to  state, 
but  that  there  was  a  vital  connection  is  undisputed  and  abundantly 
established  in  the  record. 

METHODS  OF  THIS  ASSOCIATION 

Coercion  and  libel  were  two  of  the  instrumentalities  used  by  the 
association  to  attain  its  ends.  If  a  co-operative  farmer's  associa- 
tion succeeded  in  securing  a  carload  or  two  of  grain  or  cattle  feed, 
a  letter  was  sent  promptly  to  the  miller  who  made  the  sale,  advis- 
ing him  that  the  managers  of  the  co-operative  association  were 
irresponsible,  and  hinting  that  the  collection  of  the  purchase  price 
would  be  difficult,  or  that  the  trade  connection  would  be  worthless. 
If  a  car  was  found  enroute,  if  possible  an  attempt  was  made  to 
divert  the  car  from  the  purchaser  and  have  it  delivered  to  some 
local  dealer.  If  a  milling  company  or  distributor  refused  to  listen 
to  the  suggestions  of  the  association,  the  officers  or  agents  of  the 
association,  travelled  about  from  town  to  town,  assemble  the  grain 
dealers  and  advised  them  that  they  should  not  buy  from 
the  miller  or  distributor  in  question,  that  they  should  each  write 
to  him  that  the  reason  he  had  lost  their  business  was  that  he  had 
made  sales  of  grain  in  wholesale  quantities  in  an  open  market  to 
individuals  not  favored  by  the  association.  The  association  desired 
to  prevent  the  spread  of  information  as  to  fraudulent  dairy  foods 
through  the  agriculture  extension  work  and  the  farm  bureaus. 
They  easily  foresaw  that  such  information  would  interfere  with 
illegitimate  profits  and  they  undertook  a  campaign  in  various  coun- 
ties of  the  State  to  prevent  the  operations  of  the  Farm  Bureau.  If 
any  given  Farm  Bureau  agent  was  active  in  trying  to  secure  dairy 
foods  at  a  lower  cost  to  the  farmers  in  his  county,  they 
sought  to  destroy  him  both  by  false  statements  and  untruthful 
representations,  and  by  active  political  work  with  the  boards 
of  supervisors.  Their  records  disclose  that  they  boasted  to  one 
another  of  their  success  in  removing  a  farm  agent  in  Delaware 
county.  Many  dairymen  came  before  the  Committee,  who,  hav- 
ing capital  and  requiring  a  large  amount  of  dairy  food,  had  been 
accustomed  to  buy  direct  of  the  wholesaler  in  carload  lots,  but  who 


792 

had  found  his  source  of  supply  cut  off  by  the  activities  of  these 
grain  dealers'  associations. 

In  order  to  magnify  their  numbers,  there  existed  first  the  State 
Association,  with  less  than  four  hundred  acknowledged  members. 
They  then  formed  in  each  community  where  possible,  a  local  asso- 
ciation consisting  of  from  three  to  ten  members.  Many  of  these 
associations  were  scattered  throughout  the  State.  In  the  event 
that  they  wished  to  bring  pressure  upon  a  given  miller  or  dis- 
tributor to  close  the  market  to  tho  dairymen,  a  grange,  or  a  co- 
operative society,  the  State  Association  first  wrote  a  letter  contain- 
ing carefully  worded  threats  to  induce  him  to  desist  from  further 
sales.  A  letter  was  then  sent  from  each  local  association  containing 
substantially  the  same  matter.  In  this  way,  this  small  group, 
was  able  to  frighten  the  milling  company  or  distributor  into  the 
belief  that  his  action  was  opposed  by  a  great  multitude  of  men  and 
his  business  seriously  threatened  by  their  ill  will. 

Naturally,  this  made  it  difficult,  and  in  many  instances, 
absolutely  impossible  for  the  individual  dairyman,  grange  or 
co-operative  society,  to  purchase  cattle  foods  in  the  open 
market.  In  other  words,  this  little  group  of  men  with  a 
relatively  insignificant  capital,  sought  to  impose  tribute  on 
all  the  great  dairy  industry  of  the  State  of  ISTew  York  and 
making  it  difficult  for  the  dairymen  to  do  business  except 
under  their  direction  and  control.  They  had  the  courage  to  ap- 
proach the  Directors  of  Farm  Bureaus  and  threaten  that  unless 
they  conducted  the  Farm  Bureau  operations  in  accordance  with 
their  wishes,  they  would  be  destroyed.  They  succeeded  in  cur- 
tailing the  activities  of  the  Farm  Bureau  by  untruthful  statements 
to  the  Department  of  Agriculture  at  Washington. 

All  of  the  statements  here  made  are  abundantly  established 
by  the  correspondence  over  the  hands  of  the  officers  and 
agents  of  this  association,  which  was  made  a  part  of  the 
record  of  the  proceedings  of  this  Committee.  This  corre- 
spondence and  evidence  has  been  turned  over  to  the  Attor- 
ney-General of  the  State  of  £Tew  York  that  he  may  be 
enabled  to  act  in  accordance  with  the  law  of  the  State.  It 
may  be  added,  however,  that  the  purpose  of  these  men  and  this 
association  was  wholly  and  entirely  sordid  and  selfish.  They 


793 

sought  not  only  the  control  of  their  own  product,  but  they  sought 
to  foreclose  the  market  to  all  but  themselves,  not  because  of  any 
economic  necessity,  but  simply  that  their  profits  might  be  enlarged 
and  that  every  man,  whether  he  were  willing  or  not,  might  be 
compelled  to  deal  through  their  particular  favored  store.  Some 
of  their  methods  are  revealed  in  small  part  by  their  correspondence, 
which  is  included  in  this  report,  not  for  the  purpose  of  disclosing 
the  full  record  of  their  activities,  but  in  order  that  some  idea  of 
their  purposes  and  aims  may  be  established. 

LETTER  SENT  TO  MEMBERS  WHO  JOINED  TIIE  ASSOCIATION  AT  ALBANY  CON- 
VENTION, JUNE  21,  22,  23. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  June  30,  1910. 
WEST  END  FEED  Co.,  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  This  is  an  acknowledgment  of  your  interest  in  the  New  York 
State  Feed  Dealers'  Association  as  evidenced  by  your  taking  out  membership 
in  the  same  at  our  recent  convention  at  Albany. 

We  were  more  than  gratified  at  the  very  large  attendance  by  dealers  from 
all  over  the  State  and  appreciate  very  much  indeed  your  personal  Ihelp  in 
making  the  meeting  the  success  that  must  be  apparent  to  all  who  were 
present. 

There  can  be  no  question  but  that  the  cementing  of  the  dealers  of  the 
State  together  in  an  organization  of  this  kind,  whio'h  has  already  drawn  into 
sympathy  with  us  such  factors  as  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Associa- 
tion, as  well  as  the  trade  journals,  is  going  to  prove  of  inestimable  value  to 
the  business  of  the  retail  dealer  in  feed  and  grain. 

We  should  not  fail,  however,  in  making  purchases  of  manufacturers  and 
jobbers  to  make  it  plain  to  them  tlhat  they  must  be  loyal  to  the  legitimate 
dealer  everywhere,  and  that  we  will  not  buy  of  them  even  if  fair  with  us 
in  some  particular  locality,  but  at  the  same  time  selling  direct  in  other 
sections. 

By  adhering  strictly  to  this  policy  it  will  redound  to  our  credit  and 
influence  as  a  body. 

If  at  any  time  you  wish  information  or  assistance,  do  not  hesitate  to 
call  on  us. 

Again  thanking  you  for  your  personal  interest  and  co-operation,  we  are, 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)  H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  August  16,  1915. 
MR.  CLYDE  ANTHONY,  Milan,  Pa.: 

Dear  Sir. —  At  a  recent  meeting  of  the  Tri-State  Retail  Feed  Dealers' 
Association,  held  at  Utica,  N".  Y.,  it  was  deemed  advisable  to  reduce  t-he 
territorial  limitations  of  that  association. 


794 

Reasons  for  said  action  had  been  previously  announced  and  were  considered 
at  that  meeting  with  the  result  that  the  name  of  the  association  was  changed 
to  New  York  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association. 

This  change  was  not  made  with  the  idea  of  dropping  any  present  members 
of  the  association,  as  the  Pennsylvania  members  were  considered  as  valuable 
as  any  in  the  organization  of  the  original  association,  and  now  the  change 
in  by-laws  in  making  it  a  state  association,  will  not  be  so  arranged  as  to 
eliminate  any  present  member,  and  it  is,  therefore,  hoped  that  the  members 
from  Pennsylvania  may  see  fit  to  remain  members  of  said  association  and 
attend  future  meetings  and  take  part  therein  as  on  former  occasions. 

We,  as  New  York  members,  were  face  to  face  witlh  a  political  problem  in 
the  co-operative  branch  of  the  State  Agricultural  Bureau  that  had  to  be 
met  politically  and  the  same  has  been  relieved  since  this  action. 

That  we  were  justified  in  our  action  is  shown  by  the  influx  of  new  members 
who  had  demanded  that  this  be  a  state  association,  and  we  are  now  asking 
our  Pennsylvania  friends  to  look  at  this  matter  in  the  friendly  way  in  which 
the  same  was  intended. 

It  was  simply  a  business  proposition  whether  we  would  stand  for  taxation 
by  the  State  for  the  destruction  of  our  own  business  or  not,  and  to  over- 
come the  same,  we  needed  more  local,  political  strength. 

Hoping  this  satisfactorily  explains  itself  and  that  you  and  all  other  Penn- 
sylvania members  will  not  feel  that  you  were  ousted  from  the  old  Tri-State, 
we  remain, 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)  H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  January  14,  1916. 
J.  E.  BABTLETT  Co.,  Jackson,  Mich.: 

Gentlemen. —  There  has  been  unloaded  at  this  station  car  No.  62754  C.  M.  & 
St.  Paul,  containing  distillers*  grains  from  you  shipped  to  the  Farmers' 
Co-operative  Company,  which  is  a  direct  buying  concern,  unloading  from 
car  to  farmers,  to  the  injury  of  the  local  dealer. 

Inasmuch  as  the  writer  is  a  regular  legitimate  dealer  here,  maintaining  an 
establishment,  employing  men  with  families,  paying  large  taxes  and  honestly 
endeavoring  to  make  a  living  for  himself  and  family,  I  take  the  liberty 
of  writing  you  with  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  if  you  appreciated  the 
status  of  this  body  of  consumers,  nothing  more  or  less,  clubbed  together  to 
take  advantage  of  the  dealer  who  has  always  extended  courtesies  to  them 
and  whom,  according  to  the  common  ethics  of  business,  it  must  be  admitted 
is  entitled  to  the  patronage  of  his  community. 

I  need  not  say  that  your  action  in  shipping  this  car  here  to  a  body  of 
consumers  is  in  direct  antagonism  to  me  as  a  dealer  and  is  hardly  in  line 
with  statements  made  in  former  correspondence  with  me  as  secretary  of 
the  New  York  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association  as  to  your  policy 
towards  direct  selling  and,  therefore,  I  am  inclined  at  the  present  moment 
to  believe  that  in  making  the  sale  and  shipment  of  this  car  here  you  were 
not  really  aware  of  its  manner  of  disposal  nor  the  purpose  of  those  purchasing 
it,  which  I  assure  you  is  none  other  than  to  side-step  or  put  one  over 
on  the  dealer  and  is  precisely  in  line  with  the  spirit  which  prompts  certain 


795 

individuals  to  deal  with  mail  order  houses  whom  you  well  know  are  not 
contributors  to  the  upkeep  or  general  welfare  of  any  community,  either 
from  a  social  or  financial  standpoint. 

The  organization,  if  it  may  be  called  such,  to  whom  you  have  sold  this 
car  is  not  a  popular  one  and  I  can  assure  you  does  not  have  the  sympathy 
of  the  majority  of  people,  either  farmers  or  business  interests.  It  is  composed 
of  a  few  disgruntled  ones,  such  as  you  find  everywhere,  and  who  either 
want  something  for  nothing,  or  else  are  so  selfish  that  they  do  not  wish 
to  see  anyone  else  make  any  progress  and  who  would  turn  you  down  as 
quickly  as  us  if  someone  came  along  and  offered  them  any  old  thing  at  a 
little  under  your  price. 

The  whole  thing  is  begotten  of  a  spirit  pregnant  with  hostility  to,  rather 
than  encouragement  of  community  interest,  and  has  not  only  affected  the 
feed  dealer,  but  has  extended  its  baneful  influence  to  every  other  clasa  of 
business  in  our  midst  or  in  any  other  town  where  such  propositions  are  being 
imposed. 

The  State  Association  of  Retail  Feed  Dealers  is  not  altogether  altruistic 
in  that  it  is  looking  after  its  own  interests  altogether.  We  are  working  in 
a  co-operative  spirit  both  with  the  manufacturer  and  consumer  and  as 
respects  the  latter,  we  propose  to  see  that  all  goods  are  sold  strictly  in 
compliance  with  State  and  Federal  laws  in  so  far  as  we  are  able  to  do  so,  and 
in  this  connection  the  writer  has  had  called  to  his  attention  the  fact  that  the 
car  of  distillers'  grains  shipped  here  by  your  firm  were  in  sacks  and  that 
there  were  no  marks  on  the  sacks  nor  tags  applied  indicating  or  specifying 
the  quality  or  brand  of  goods,  analysis  and  weight,  and  while  the  writer 
saw  a  number  of  these  sacks  on  farmers'  sleighs,  also  in  the  car,  which 
would  bear  out  the  intimation,  I  do  not  wish  to  even  suggest  the  thought 
of  complaint,  but  simply  desire  to  impress  upon  you  that  we  are  not  a 
one-sided  organization  by  any  means.  We  believe  in  living  and  let  live  and 
we  also  believe  that  there  is  business  enough  for  all,  but  that  it  should  be 
conducted  along  proper  channels  and  that  is  through  the  legitimate  dealer. 

No  manufacturer  or  jobber  can  reasonably  expect  to  sell  every  dealer,  and 
the  idea  that  a  dealer  can  be  forced  to  handle  any  feed  is  absurd,  bcause 
that  principle  can  be  worked  to  the  disadvantage  of  those  who  attempt  to 
carry  it  out  in  that  you,  for  instance,  might  have  a  dealer  customer  who, 
like  many  others,  is  giving  you  a  large  share  of  his  business,  when  along 
comes  another  manufacturer  or  jobber  who  might  insist  that  your  customer 
must  handle  some  of  his  goods  which  are  similar  and  represented  equally 
as  good  and  possibly  so,  with  the  threat  that  if  he  does  not  he  will  go  out 
and  sell  direct.  Now,  in  such  an  event,  where  do  you  get  off? 

I  simply  mention  the!  above  as  an  illustration.  We  sell  our  feeds  on  a 
quality  basis;  have  facilities  for  State  and  private  laboratory  test  and  we 
will  place  our  goods  side  of  anything  offered  on  the  market  and  as  low,  if 
not  a  little  lower,  for  we  sell  for  cash. 

I  shall  be  very  glad  to  receive  the  favor  of  a  reply. 

Yours  respectfully, 

(Signed)  H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


796 

THE  J.  E.  BARTLETT  CO. 

DRIED  SALVAGE  GRAINS. 

WHEAT,  CORN,  OATS,  BARLEY. 

THE  RED  MILL,  JACKSON,  MICHIGAN 

Capital,  $115,000.00.  Distributing  Stations 

Members  Jackson,  Mich. 

Board  of  Commerce.  ™edo,  Oh™' 

Interstate   Cotton   Seed  Crushers'  Chicago,  111. 


Association.  Use  *°W^n'8  Code. 

Michigan  Grain  and  Hay  Dealers'  Use  Yopp  s  Code' 

Association.  ^  Dlstance  Phones 

Bell   2600.  Citizen  217 

February  5,  1916. 
MB.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.  :  . 

Dear  Sir.  —  This-  will  acknowledge  your  letter  of  January  14th.  The  writer 
was  out  of  the  city  almost  continuously  during  January,  which  has  occasioned 
the  delay  in  replying  to  your  letter. 

We  appreciate  the  frankness  and  fairness  manifested  in  your  letter.  We 
do  protect  the  dealer  wherever  we  have  a  dealer's  trade.  We  have  over 
a  thousand  live  dealers'  accounts  on  our  books.  We  have  traded  with  these 
people  a  long  time  —  with  some  of  them  for  over  20  years. 

We  have  found  in  your  district,  by  sending  our  salesmen  through,  that  it 
is  almost  impossible  to  introduce  a  new  line  of  feeds  through  the  dealers. 
We  doi  not  blame  the  dealer  in  the  least.  He  does  not  wish  to  take  the 
time  to  do  the  talking  necessary  to  introduce  a  new  feed,  but  we  do  not 
feel  satisfied  in  simply  being  shut  out  and  have  therefore  advertised  and  have 
sold  and  are  selling  an  occasional  car  in  your  district,  but  we  are  ready 
at  any  and  all  times  to  do  this  business-  through  the  dealer  and  give  him 
a  commission  of  a  dollar  per  ton  as  soon  as  he  is  ready  to  handle  our  account 
and  give  us  an  occasional  car. 

If  this  is  not  the  right  attitude  for  us  to  take,  how  are  we  going  to 
introduce  our  line?  We  would  welcome  any  suggestion  you  have  to  offer. 

Very  truly  yours, 

THE  J.   E.  BARTLETT  CO., 
JEB:B  J.  E.  BABTLETT. 


797 

THE  J.  E.  BARTLETT  CO. 

DRIED  SALVAGE  GRAINS. 

WHEAT,  CORN,  OATS,  BARLEY. 

THE  RED  MILL,  JACKSON,  MICH. 

Capital,  $115,000.00.  Distributing  Stations 

Members  Jackson,  Mich. 

Board  of  Commerce.  Toled*'  Ohio' 

Interstate    Cotton   Seed    Crushers'  Chicago,  111. 

Association.  Use  *******  Code- 

Michigan.  Grain  and  Hay  Dealers'  Use  Y°PP'S  Code 

Association.  ^^  D^nce.  Phones 

Bell  2600.                             Citizen  217 

March  11,  1916. 

MB.  H.  M.  KING,  Secretary,  New  York  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers3  Assn.,  Water- 
mile,  A7.  Y.  : 

Dear  Sir. —  According  to  our  records  you  have  never  advised  us  whether 
or  not  the  Co-operative  Association  in  your  city  has  a  store  or  is  merely 
a  number  of  farmers  clubbed  together  to  buy  feed  at  wholesale  prices.  We 
believe  if  they  have  a  store  in  your  city  they  have  a  perfect  right  to  buy  feed 
at  the  best  price  obtainable.  Furthermore,  we  wish  to  say  that  we  have  a 
large  sale  on  National  Gluten  in  your  city.  If  it  is  antagonistic  to  you 
for  us  to  sell  the  Co-operative  Company,  why  don't  you  accept  the  exclusive 
agency  for  our  line  and  guarantee  to  buy  as  many  cars  of  Gluten  feed  as 
they  will? 

The  output  of  National  Gluten  feed  is  large  and  we  are  compelled  to 
furnish  the  mills  several  shipping  instructions  daily  in  order  to  take  care 
of  it  properly.  If  we  follO\ved  your  views  and  agreed  to  refuse  to  sell  anyone 
in  your  town  simply  because  you  refuse  to  handle  it,  it  would  be  impossible 
for  us  to  make  disposition  of  the  feed. 

For  your  interest,  advise  that  National  Gluten  feed  is  the  highest  grade 
of  distiller's  grain  manufactured.  It  is  guaranteed  31  per  cent,  protein  and 
according  to  several  state  experimental  stations  will  analyze  nearly  34  per 
cent.  It  has  apparently  90  per  cent,  corn,  is  palatable  and  highly  digestible 
and  can  be  fed  in  any  quantity  without  harmful  effects.  This  is  the  reason 
why  when  it  is  once  introduced  in  a  territory  it  retains-  the  trade. 

Are  you  interested  in  handling  a  feed  of  quality  —  a  feed  that  will  please 
your  trade  and  bring  you  more  unsolicited  business?  Such  feeds  make 
satisfied  customers. 

Give  National  Gluten  feed  consideration  and  advise  immediately  whether 
or  not  you  wish  to  secure  the  agency.  Let's  work  together  and  not  be 
arbitrary. 

Yours  very  truly, 

THE  J.  E.  BARTLETT  COMPANY, 
CAS/KC  C.  A.  SMITH. 


798 

WATEEVILLE,  N.  Y.,  March  23,  1916. 
J.  E.  BARTLETT  Co.,  Jackson,  Mich.: 

Gentlemen. —  Referring  to  yours  of  March  11th. 

I  have  advised  you  in  previous  correspondence  that  this  Co-operative 
Association  was  simply  unloading  stuff  from  the  car  to  consumers  direct. 

You  have  shipped  three  cars  to  these  people  here  at  Waterville,  which  have 
been  distributed  in  this  manner. 

The  shipment  of  goods  to  them  which  are  being  distributed  in  this  way  is 
antagonistic  to  me  as  a  dealer  maintaining  an  establishment  to  do  business 
legitimately  and  is  directly  contrary  to  assertions  made  by  you  in  previous 
correspondence  that  you  wished  to  do  business  through  the  regular  dealers 
and  that  if  after  making  effort  to  interest  the  regular  dealer  you  failed, 
then  you  would  sell  direct  and  thereupon  the  dealer  would  listen  to  your 
argument.  This  "argument,"  however,  won't  work  in  this  State. 

I  most  assuredly  will  not  accept  the  exclusive  agency  for  National  Gluten 
nor  guarantee  to  buy  as  many  cars  as  they  will.  Such  a  proposition  is  repug- 
nant to  me  now,  especially  so  since  you  have  repudiated  the  representations 
in  your  previous  correspondence  and,  furthermore,  I  would  not  accept  such 
a  proposition  from  any  concern. 

You  never  solicited  me  in  any  way  to  handle  your  goods  and  you  directly 
placed  them  in  the  hands  of  a  direct  selling  agency. 

I  don't  doubt  but  that  the  output  of  National  Gluten  is  of  some  volume; 
so  also  is  the  output  of  other  distilleries,  but  the  agencies  of  such  distilleries 
are  able  to  place  same  through  proper  channels  of  distribution.  Your  sales- 
manship and  the  quality  of  your  goods  will  take  care  of  your  portion  of  the 
output  of  the  distillery  whose  account  you  handle  through  legitimate  chan- 
nels the  same  as  others  do. 

Your  National  Gluten  is  not  superior  to  a  number  of  other  brands  of 
distiller's  grains  that  I  might  mention.  I  am  interested  in  feeds  of  quality 
and  always  have  been.  I  handle  only  such  feeds  and  believe  I  know  and 
am  in  a  position  to  know  or  to  very  soon  determine  as  to  any  feed. 

You  say  "  Let's  work  together  and  not  be  arbitrary."  That  is  just  exactly 
what  we  tried  to  do  with  you  when  we  first  took  up  the  matter  of  direct 
selling  and  your  advertising  to  sell  direct. 

We  had  only  the  best  of  motives  and  there  was  no  spirit  of  arbitrariness 
or  vindictiveness  on  our  part  whatever.  We  simply  made  endeavor  in  a  most 
friendly  manner  to  urge  you  to  take  the.  stand  that  most  reputable  manufac- 
turers and  jobbers  had  taken  and  more  have  since  in  respect  to  this  practice, 
believing  then,  as  we  do  now,  that  you  would  make  more  friends  and  secure 
more  business  than  by  antagonizing  the  legitimate  dealer. 

If  you  believe  it  is  to  your  interest  to  do  other,  it  is  up  to  you. 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)  H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

Dictated  but  not  re-read. 


799 

0.  E.  M.  KELLER,  President  D.  W.  WILLIAMS,  Treasurer 

A.  G.  RUTHERFORD,  Secretary 

ARCADY  FARMS-MILLING  COMPANY 

Mill    at    Rondout,    Illinois, 

on  the  C.,  M.  &  St.  P.  and 

E.    J.    &    E.    Railways. 

RONDOUT,  ILLINOIS,  Sept.  24,  1915. 
The  N.  Y.  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Assn.,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Attention—    Mr.  H.  M.  King,  Sec'y. 

Dear  Sirs. —  This  will  acknowlege  your  kind  favor  of  the  21st,  and  we 
assure  you  that  your  letter  is  received  with  interest  and  appreciation  and  that 
its  contents  will  receive  immediate  investigation. 

The  car  of  feed  you  call  our  attention  to  was  sold  by  us  to  Allen  & 
Stoddard  at  Groton,  N.  Y.,  to  be  shipped  to  Preble,  just  as  we  have  sold 
them  a  number  of  other  cars  for  Groton  and  several  other  points,  with  the 
understanding  that  they  were  and  are  legitimate  dealers. 

We  realize  as  well  as  anyone  the  propriety  of  protecting  retail  feed 
dealers  and  have  made  it  a  part  of  our  business  policy. 

Within  the  last  twelve  months  we  have  established  about  eight  hundred 
agencies  with  retail  feed  dealers  and  at  all  points  are  protecting  feed  dealers 
in  our  sales  to  consumers,  farmers,  etc. 

In  the  same  mail  with  your  letter,  we  received  a  letter  from  Becker  &  Co., 
at  Central  Bridge,  N.  Y.,  copy  of  which  we  are  attaching  herewith  showing 
that  we  protected  him  and  that  it  is  our  policy  to  do  so. 

We  trust  that  you  will  assure  your  members  that  such  is  our  policy  and 
that  this  particular  case  is  being  investigated  and  will  either  be  taken  up 
further  with  you  in  case  we  feel  that  there  is  some  justice  to  the  other  side 
or  else  we  will  refrain  from  making  further  sales  to  these  people. 

We  want  to  assure  you  of  our  earnestness  and  desire  to  co-operate  with 
you  and  ask  that  you  and  your  mmbers  feel  perfectly  free  at  any  time  to 
write  us  on  this  or  any  other  subjects  of  such  mutual  interest. 

We  are  having  our  New  York  representative  investigate  this,  at  once,  and 
will  be  pleased  to  write  you  further  at  a  little  later  date. 

Very  truly  yours, 

OK.HW  O.  K. 

Encl.  President. 


800 

(Copy) 
BECKER  &  CO. 

CENTRAL  BRIDGE,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  20,  1915. 
ARCADY  FARMS  &  MILLING  Co.,  Rondout,  III.: 
Gentlemen. —  Yours  of  the  13th  at  hand. 

We  note  you  have  protected  our  commission  of  $1.00  per  ton  on  the  car 
feed  sold  W.  H.  Sidney,  same  to  be  paid  when  he  takes  up  the  draft.  This 
is  in  line  with  the  conversation  we  had  with  your  Mr.  Lee. 

We  thank  you  in  the  fair  way  you  have  treated  us  in  the  matter  and  hope 
to  help  you  place  some  more  in  the  future. 

Very  truly  yours, 

BECKER  &  Co., 
By  W.  D.  B. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  September  21,  1915. 
ARCADY  FARM  MILLING  Co.,  Roundout,  III.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  am  informed  by  a  member  of  the  New  York  State  Retail 
Feed  Dealers'  Association  that  a  car  of  Arcady  Dairy  Feed  was  shipped  by  you 
and  unloaded  at  Preble,  New  York,  through  a  direct- selling  agency,  the  car 
having  arrived  at  Ereble,  August  26th.  As  secretary  of  the  New  York  State 
Association,  I  have  been  requested  by  this  member,  who  is  a  legitimate 
dealer  at  that  point,  to  take  the  matter  up  with  you,  as  no  doubt  your  action 
was  due  to  oversight  as  to  the  effect  on  the  legitimate  dealer  at  the  above 
named  point. 

We  note  that  you  are  a  member  of  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers" 
Association.  The  New  York  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association  is  also 
a  member  and  I  believe  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Association  favors 
the  distribution  of  feed  through  legitimate  dealers  whom  they  recognize  as  the 
legitimate  channel  of  distribution.  We  are  co-operating  with  the  American 
Feed  Manufacturers'  Assocation  in  every  way  and  when  cases  of  direct 
selling  arise,  which  we  regard  as  matters  of  serious  injury  to  the  legitimate 
dealer,  we  naturally  desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  manufacturer,  whole- 
saler or  jobber,  in  a  friendly  way,  to  the  injustice  of  it,  with  the  hope  that 
they  will  consider  its  effect  both  on  the  regular  dealer  and  the  very  .pleasant 
relations  existing  between  the  dealer  and  manufacturer  which  it  is  desirable 
to  stimulate  in  every  way  possible. 

The  legitimate  dealer  in  this  State  is  obliged  to  keep  up  an  establishment 
to  do  business;  he  is  a  large  tax  payer  and  occupies  an  important  space  in 
the  interests  of  a  community;  he  is  a  man  who  extends  untold  courtesies  and 
is  an  economic  necessity,  while  these  direct  selling  agencies  are,  as  a  rule, 
something  of  light  calibre  originated  in  most  cases  for  the  purpose  of  pulling 
the  farmer's  leg,  by  someone  the  farmer  does  not  know,  and  eventually 
stinging  him  good  and  proper.  These  movements  do  not  last  long,  but  they 
do  injury  while  they  are  operating. 

We  sincerely  trust  that  you  will  receive  this  letter  in  the  same  friendly 
spirit  as  it  is  written  and  that  you  will  give  the  matter  earnest  consideration. 

Hoping  to  hear  from  you  at  an  early  date,  I  beg  to  remain 

Yours  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


801 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  13,  1915. 
Mr.  FEANK  F.  MILLER,  Proble,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Yours  of  November  6th  received  with  interest.  Have  sent 
copy  of  same  to  our  Executive  Committee,  also  to  Mr.  H.  R.  Wilber,  secretary 
of  the  Mutual  Millers  and  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 

A  meeting  of  the  Executive  Committee,  together  with  representatives  of 
all  local  or  county  associations  in  the  State,  is  to  be  held  in  Syracuse,  Thurs- 
day, November  18th. 

We  are  going  to  place  all  correspondence  and  facts  in  our  possession  in 
regard  to  those  who  have  been  selling  direct  before  this  meeting  so  that  a 
more  wide-spread  understanding  among  the  dealers  will  result  as  to  those 
who  are  not  using  us  just  exactly  along  proper  lines. 

The  Arcady  people  called  me  on  the  'phone  from  Utica  a  few  days  ago 
and  advised  me  the  action  they  had  taken  along  the  line  of  cutting  out  the 
Allen  &  Stoddard  deal,  also  making  good  to  the  dealers  who  had  been  affected 
by  their  sales  in  your  section.  Also  had  information  from  a  Cortland  dealer 
recently  that  this  firm  is  having  difficulty  in  getting  stuff  from  those  who 
have  been  selling  them. 

Have  a  letter  from  Hunter-Robinson-Wenz  stating  that  they  are  investi- 
gating the  matter  of  sales  to  granges,  co-operative  companies  and  such  con- 
cerns as  Allen  &  Stoddard  and  that  they  do  not  care  to  sell  to  only  legitimate 
dealers  and  jobbers. 

Will  write  Brisbin  again  and  your  letter  furnished  a  lot  of  good  ammunition 
to  use  in  this  direction.  I  think  that  our  organization  would  not  hesitate  to 
oust  him  from  membership  unless  he  takes  an  entirely  different  stand. 

Of  course,  we  are  very  much  pleased  with  our  efforts  of  bringing  relief 
in  many  cases  and  it  surely  looks  as  if  the  organization  was  accomplishing 
what  we  have  always  claimed  for  it.  We  are  gradually  getting  new  members, 
but  want  more;  in  fact,  every  dealer  ought  to  get  in  line  with  us.  In  this 
manner  we  will  be  in  position  to  back  up  our  demands  right  smart. 

Thanking  you  very  much  for  the  information  and  hoping  you  will  not 
fail  to  keep  us  posted  in  regard  to  anything  that  comes  up  that  we  should 
know,  I  beg  to  remain 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

Dictated  by  Mr.  King  but  not  re-read. 
26 


802 

CORN   PRODUCTS   REFINING   COMPANY 
Whitehall  Building 
17  BATTERY  PLACE 

NEW  YORK,  November  30M,  1915. 

Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Secretary,  The  N.  Y.  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 
Waterville,  N.  Y.  : 

My  Dear  Mr.  King. —  Replying  to  yours  of  the  27th,  I  am  very  glad 
to  have  you  call  our  attention  to  anything  that  you  consider  an  irregularity 
in  the  scheme  of  carrying  on  the  feed  business.  As  I  stated  at  Jamestown, 
we  always  do  business  with  the  retail  dealer  wherever  he  will  handle  our 
goods  and  will  distribute  them  for  us,  or  someone  of  that  nature  in  the 
section  to  make  that  distribution. 

Mr.  Perry,  of  Washington  Mills,  who  made  this  complaint,  used  to  buy 
considerable  Buffalo*  Corn  Gluten  Feed.  In  1913  we  sold  him  five  cars;  in 
1914  we  sold  him  nothing;  in  1915,  one  car.  He  has  been  handling  competi- 
tors*' gluten  feeds  in  place  of  ours,  although  Mr.  Dean  has  made  every  effort 
to  secure  his  business.  I  am  not  giving  you  this  information  in  extenuation 
of  the  sale  of  the  Co-operative  Company,  but  the  thought  perhaps  will  throw 
a  new  light  on  the  situation  for  you.  The  Globe  Elevator  Company  bought 
this  feed  outright  and  we  have  no  right  under  the  law  to  dictate  to  whom 
they  should  sell  it.  They  were  taking  their  own  chances  on  the  market  and 
the  price  they  paid  for  it  was  the  same  as  that  quoted  to  the  retail  dealer 
at  the  time. 

It  is  my  purpose  to  write  the  Globe  Elevator  Company  calling  their  atten- 
tion to  this  situation  and  asking  them  if  they  can  do  anything  to  rectify  it. 
The  Clayton  Act  does  not  permit  us  to  dictate  any  terms  of  resale  to  anyone 
to  whom  to  sell  our  feed. 

I  want  to  do  all  I  can  to  encourage  the  co-operation  and  free  interchange 
of  views  between  your  association  and  the  individual  manufacturer.  We 
can  do  a  good  deal  for  one  another  in  our  several  capacities,  and  I  hope  you 
will  continue  to  let  me  hear  of  anything  of  this  nature  that  comes  up,  and, 
in  turn,  I  will  take  pleasure  in  calling  attention  to  anything  in  which  you 
can  help  us. 

Yours  very  truly, 

R.  P.  WALDEN, 
RPW  ERC  Manager. 

WATEBVIIXE,  N.  Y.,  November  27,   1915. 
CORN  PRODUCTS   REFINING  Co.,  New  York  City,  N.  Y.: 

Attention  Mr.  R.  P.  Walden. 

My  Dear  Mr.  Walden. —  I  hardly  know  how  to  start  this  letter,  but  as  I 
know  you  personally,  I  am  going  to  be  very  frank  and  say  that  the  very 
first  complaint  in  regard  to  Buffalo  Gluten  having  been  shipped  direct  to  the 
consumer,  has  come  to  our  attention  this  morning. 

I  am  informed  by  a  member  of  our  association,  a  dealer  at  Washington. 
Mills,  N.  Y.,  that  a  car  of  Buffalo  Gluten  in  sacks  has  been  shipped  to  the 
Farmers'  Co-operative  Co.,  of  Oneida  county,  and  delivered  from  the  car  to 


803 

farmers  direct  at  $27.00  per  ton.  The  number  of  the  car  is  500381;  initial, 
P.  R.  R.  I  understand  that  the  Globe  Elevator  Co.,  of  Buffalo,  are  the  people 
who  sold  the  car  to  this  co-operative  company. 

Now,  we  have  always  felt  that  the  Corn  Products  Refining  Co.  were  in 
entire  sympathy  with  the  principles  of  our  State  Association  and  we  know 
very  well,  indeed,  that  nothing  of  this  kind  would  ever  happen  if  you  were 
aware  of  it. 

The  greatest  trouble,  as  I  have  said  time  and  again,  is  not  with  the  manu- 
facturers, but  with  certain  jobbers  who  persist  in  selling  direct  to  the  injury 
of  the  legitimate  dealer  and  I  am  sure  that  in  taking  this  matter  up  with 
you  and  advising  you  of  the  facts  in  the  case,  that  you  will  take  the  matter 
up  with  the  Globe  Elevator  Co.,  in  such  a  way  that  there  will  be  no  repetition 
on  their  part  of  such  sales  to  these  co-operative  or  direct-buying  agencies. 
Practically  every  gluten  manufacturer  has  taken  this  stand  and  have  advised 
their  jobbers  that  they  must  make  no  more  sales  direct  or  to  agencies  which 
mean  the  same  thing. 

Awfully  sorry  to  have  to  call  your  attention  to  this  matter,  but  I  feel 
perfectly  free  in  doing  it  and  know  that  you  will  be  glad  that  I  have  done  so. 

With  very  kind  regards,  I  beg  to  remain 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

(Copy) 
FARM  BUREAUS 

OF 

NEW  YORK  STATE 

U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  New  York  State 

State  College  of  Agriculture  College  of  Agriculture 

State  Department  of  Agriculture  Cornell  University 

County  Farm  Bureau  Associations  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 
Co-operating 

March  27,  1910. 

Mr.  H.  M.  KING,   Secretary,  N.   Y.  Slate  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 

Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Mr.  King. —  Replying  to  your  letter  of  March  20th,  you  are  at  liberty 
to  send  copies  of  our  circular  letter  No.  3  on  co-operative  buying  and  selling 
to  any  and  all  persons  which  you  may  desire  and  to  the  press,  if  you  wish. 
Of  course,  the  gist  of  this  ia  that  we  propose  to  encourage  and  assist  in  th« 
developing  of  co-operative  buying  and  selling  organizations  where  we  believe 
these  can  serve  the  interests  of  the  farmers  better  than  other  agencies.  On 
the  other  hand,  if  we  believe  that  existing  agencies;  serve  the  interests  of 
farmers  better  than  any  co-operative  organization  would,  we  shall  advocate 
the  use  of  these.  The  Farm  Bureaus  stand  primarily  for  the  best  interests 
of  the  farming  population.  This  is  in  the  best  interests  of  the  general  public 
also,  because  of  the  intimate  relation  between  the  consumer  and  the  producer 
of  agricultural  products.  The  only  place  where  we  draw  the  line  is  in  our 


804: 

Farm  Bureau  managers  actually  handling  funds,  soliciting  orders,  and  send- 
ing in  orders  to  companies.  We  do  this  for  two  reasons;  first,  because  we 
believe  farmers  should  do  these  things  for  themselves,  and  second,  to  avoid 
the  charge  which  is  sure  to  come  up  whether  there  is  any  basis  for  it  or  not, 
that  the  Farm  Bureau  men  are  getting  a  "  rake  off  "  on  the  deal. 

I  resent  the  insinuations  that  you  say  are  being  made  as  to  the  activities 
of  Farm  Bureau  managers,  which  do  not  comply  with  the  State  policies.  Why 
do  men  make  these  insinuations  if  they  have  not  the  facts,  and  if  they  have 
the  facts  why  do  they*  not  submit  them  to  us?  You  have  submitted  one 
rather  weak  case  in  your  letter  of  some  weeks  ago.  I  am  investigating  this 
matter  and  as  soon  as  I  get  the  facts  together,  I  shall  give  them  to  you 
and  if  necessary,  to  the  press  of  the  State.  It  is  very  unfair  to  be  spreading 
rumors  that  are  not  based  upon  the  facts  in  the  case  and  I  have  yet  to  find 
a  violation  of  our  general  policy. 

Very  truly  yours, 

(Signed)     M.  C.  BURBITT, 
Director  of  Farm  Bureaus. 


THE  MUTUAL  MILLERS  AND  FEED  DEALERS'  ASSOCIATION 

OFFICIALS  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 

WALTER   MEBBICK,   President,  A.   E.   DYE,   Forestville,   N.  Y. 

Corry,   Pa.  A.  B.  ARCHER,  Conewango,  N.  Y. 

EDWIN   A.  BAGG,  Vice-President,  A.  HERSPEBGEB,  Mayville,  N.  Y. 

Conewango  Valley,  N.  Y. 
H.   R.   WILBEB,   Secretary, 

Jamestown,  N.  Y 
ROY  MULKIE,  Ass't  Secretary, 

Union  City,  Pa. 
HENBY  NEFF,  Treasurer, 

Salamanca,  N.  Y. 

OFFICE  OF  THE  SECRETARY,  H.  R.  WILDER, 
600  Chadakoin  Building 

JAMESTOWN,  N.  Y.,  May  12,  1916. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Secretary,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

My  Dear  Mr.  King. —  Have  yours  of  the  llth  and  have  noted  same  very 
carefully,  as  well  as  copy  of  the  letter  from  Mr.  Burritt. 

Now,  not  time  to  write  much  to-day,  but  will  write  Mr.  Merrick  at  Corey 
and  send  along  your  letter,  and  believe  I  can  and  should  get  out  a  circular 
letter,  copying  the  larger  part  of  your  letter  and  by  adding  something  to  it 
put  it  before  all  of  our  members  andj  see  if  we  cannot  get  some  of  them 
started  for  Albany. 

Looks  as  though!  Burritt  was  ready  to  take  the  bull  by  the  horns,  and 
wondering  just  what  he  means  when  he  says:  "We  are  totally  out  of 
sympathy  with  some  of  the  methods  pursued  by  some  men,  and  we  believe 
that  the  situation  in  some  sections  is  intolerable  and  must  and  will  be 
changed." 


$05 

By  the  way,  our  Mr.  Kessler  picked  up  a  tag  yesterday  from  a  car  of  feed 
which  was  shipped  into  Cherry  Creek.  He  was  unable  at  this  time  to  find  out 
who  shipped  the  car,  or  who  made  it.  Guess  it  is  rather  evident  who  sold 
it.  Will  try  and  get  more  information  on  this  later. 

Yours  very  truly, 

WILBEB, 
HRW-S  Secretary. 

OFFICE  OF  SECRETARY  RETAIL  FEED  DEALERS'  ASSOCIATION 
BULLVILLE,  NEW  YORK 

OFFICERS 

President,  THOMAS  FULTON,  Washingtonville,  N.  Y. 
Vice-President,  SEYMOUR  H.  LAWRENCE,  Sussex,  N.  J. 
Secretary,  FRANK  C.  JONES,  Bullville,  N.  Y. 
Treasurer,  H.  A.  HORTON,  Johnson,  N.  Y. 

BULLVILLE,  N.  Y.,  May  5,  1916. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  At  a  meeting  of  the  Orange-Sussex  Association  yesterday,  the 
turn  of  affairs  taken  in  the  Farm  Bureau  matter,  especially  as  regards  the 
position  taken  by  the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  met  with  consider- 
able discussion.  I  am  authorized  and,  in  fact,  directed  to  take  the  matter  up 
with  you  and  Mr.  Carrier  with  a  view  of  getting,  if  possible,  an  appointment 
with  Commissioner  Wilson  at  Albany  and  possibly  Director  Burritt  at  the 
same  time,  for  the  purpose  of  discussing  the  position  taken  by  Mr.  Burritt 
with  reference  to  the  part  taken  by  county  managers1  in  Co-operative  Associa- 
tions. 

If  the  result  of  a  conference  with  these  men  is  not  entirely  in  accord  with 
our  views  and  the  position  they  are  now  taking  is  adhered  to  by  them,  I  am 
directed  to  prepare  a  statement  on  the  situation  and  to  present  the  same  per- 
sonally at  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Association  at  their  annual  meet- 
ing in  Peoria  next  month  for  the  purpose  of  enlisting  their  active  support  in 
every  way  toward  the  elimination  of  the  objective  features  such  as  are  stated 
in  the  last  paragraph  of  Secretary  Houston's  letter  to  you. 

I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  spirit  of  antagonism  shown  by  Burritt  is  going 
to  stand  in  the  way  of  any  satisfactory1  solution  of  differences  very  soon, 
but  our  people  consider  the  situation  too  serious  to  stand  still  and  submit  to 
the  roller  passing  over  them  withou  doing  something  to  head  it  off. 

A  copy  of  this  letter  is  going  to  Mr.  Carrier  and,  if  you  consider  the  plan 
as  outlined  worthy  of  carrying  out,  you  may  make  the  appointment  with 
these  men  and  I  will  meet  with  you  at  any  time  or  place.  Please  let  me  have 
your  views  promptly  as  the  time  ia  rather  short. 

Yours  very  truly, 

F,  C.  Joires, 

Secretary. 


806 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  January  29,  1916. 

C.  J.  LOWN,  Secretary,  Dutehess  Co.  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  Rhine- 
leek,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. — I  beg  to  acknowledge  yours  of  the  28th,  with  copy  of  resolution 
adopted  by  the  Association;  this  is  all  right.  I  have  sent  copy  of  it  to  a 
number  of  our  officers  and  would  say  that  this  very  matter,  insofar  as  feeds 
are  concerned,  was  brought  up  at  the  last  meeting  of  the  State  Association 
in  Utica  and  was  discussed  with  members  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Association  who  thought  that  there  might 
be  some  action  taken  by  that  Association  relative  to  the  matter.  I  do  not 
know  that  they  have  taken  such  action  as  yet,  but  I  do  know  that  some  man- 
ufacturers took  an  individual  stand  in  the  matter;  for  instance,  the  Ameri- 
can Milling  Company,  who  sent  out  to  dealers  a  certificate  agreeing  to  pro- 
tect them  in  any  prosecution  arising  from  the  failure  of  their  feeds  to  com- 
ply with  the  laws  of  the  State. 

I  am  enclosing  for  your  information  also  copy  of  letter  from  Mr.  Dean  of 
Delhi  relative  to  the  Farm  Bureau  appropriation  in  Delaware  County.  This 
may  be  of  interest  to  you,  as  I  know  you  took  some  action  a  year  ago  in  re- 
gard to  the  very  same  matter  in  your  county  and  I,  myself,  personally  went 
before  the  Board  of  Supervisors  in  this  county  and  fought  the  appropriation, 
but  it  was  finally  adopted  with  the  distinct  undersanding  that  there  should 
be  no  connection  between  the  Farm  Bureau  and  the  Co-operative  Company. 
This  is  surely  something  that  every  county  should  look  after  and  so  long  as 
they  keep  their  hands  off  the  dealer,  as  Mr.  Dean  suggests,  we  have  no  ob- 
jection to  the  Farm  Bureaus,  although  I  believe  that  a  whole  lot  of  their 
work  is  unpracticable  and  an  unnecessary  expenditure  of  money,  as  the  same 
information  may  be  secured  and  is  given  from  three  or  four  different  sources 
already. 

I  am  advised  that  the  meeting  of  the  Mutual  Millers  at  Buffalo  yes- 
terday was  a  very  enthusiastic  and  successful  one  and  that  a  number  of 
manufacturers  were  present  from  the  West,  which  shows  that  we  certainly 
have  engaged  their  attention  quite  largely  since  our  association  became  so 
active. 

With  very  kind  regards,  beg  to  remain, 

Respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  June  I3th,  1916. 

Mr.  GEORGE  UTLEY,  Secretary,  Pulaski,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Mr.  Utley. —  I  hope  you  are  planning  to  attend  the  Convention  at 
Albany  together  with  as  many  as  possible  from,  your  Association. 

A  number  of  the  fellows  are  going  down  to  be  there  Tuesday  evening,  the 
20th,  and  get  together  and  organize  —  we  would  like  to  have  you  join  us. 

If  you  have  any  information  in  regard  to  the  activities  of  your  Farm 
Bureau  Agent  bring  it  along. 

I  think  you  understand  that  we  have  no  quarrel  with  the  Farm  Bureau 
and  will  support  it  willingly  —  but  we  want  them  to  leave  the  Feed  and  Seed 
business  alone. 


807 

1  think  we  will  have  some  facts  in  respect  to  their  activities  in  different 
sections  of  the  State  which  do  not  bear  out  with  the  functions  of  Farm 
Bureau  Agents  as  set  forth  by  the  different  Controlling  Agencies. 

We  sincerely  hope  to  see  you  at  Albany  and  believe  the  prospects  are 
fair  for  a  pretty  good  and  enjoyable  time. 

Let  me  know  if  the  fellows  are  planning  to  come. 

Yours    sincerely, 

H.  M.  KING. 


WATERVUXE,  N.  Y.,  June  3,  1916. 
Mr.  ROBERT  NICHOLL,  Roxbury,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  I  duly  received  your  letter  of  the  16th  and  have  been  follow- 
ing this  matter  up  through  other  channels  since. 

I  am  in  receipt  of  a  letter  from  Mr.  Schell,  also  received  a  call  from  him 
last  evening,  and  lie  advises  that  you  will  come  to  Albany  for  the  Conven- 
tion and  I  am  writing  this  to  urge  you  to  do  so  and  to  endeavor  to  arrive 
there  the  afternoon  or  evening  of  the  day  previous  to  the  Convention;  that 
is  the  20th,  as  a,  number  of  the  more  active  members  of  the  Association 
propose  to  get  there  and  hold  a  sort  of  "  get-together "  meeting  the  evening 
before  and  go  over  some  of  these  matters  so  as  to  organize  for  the  purpose 
of  discussion  the  next  day.  Mr.  Sehell  suggests  that  it  might  be  possible 
for  you  to  get  Mr.  Wyckoff  to  accompany  you  and  we  would  be  very  glad  to 
have  him  do  so  if  he  is  willing. 

Our  main  idea  in  getting  the  men  which  we  have  secured  to  speak  at  this 
convention  is  to  have  representatives  of  all  the  agencies  backing  up  the 
Farm  Bureau  proposition,  also  to  secure  the  very  largest  attendance  we  have 
ever  had  at  a  meeting  of  dealers  so  that  we  may  show  these  people  that  we 
are  averse  to  any  interference  with  the  retail  dealer's  business  by  the  Farm 
Bureau;  otherwise  we  are  perfectly  willing  to  support  it. 

Trusting  we  may  have  the  pleasure  of  meeting  you  at  Albany,  I  beg  to 
remain, 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

May  12,  1916. 
Messrs.  J.  E.  ROANTEEE  &  Co.,  Canastota,  N.  Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  The  Annual  Convention  of  the  New  York  State  Retail  Feed 
Dealers'  Association  will  be  held  at  "The  Hampton,"  Albany,  N.  Y.,  June 
21st,  22d  and  23d. 

You  are  of  course  aware  of  the  activities  of  the  Farm  Bureau  and  the 
discussion  that  has  taken  place  of  late  in  regard  to  the  position  of  this  in- 
stitution respecting  the  functions  of  Farm  Bureau  Managers  in  the  various 
counties  of  the  State  as  applying  towards  influencing  consumers  to  buy  at 
wholesale. 

At  a  recent  conference  of  Manufacturers,  Jobbers  and  Retail  Feed  Dealers 
called  under  the  auspices  of  this  association,  resolutions  were  adopted  in 
opposition  to  the  activities  of  Farm  Bureau  Agents  along  these  lines  and 
the  same  wore  forwarded  to  the  various  agencies  having  control  over  the 


808 

Farm  Bureau,  i.  e.,  the  Department  of  Agriculture  at  Washington,  the  De- 
partment of  Agriculture  of  New  York  State  and  the  Chairmen  of  the  various 
Boards  of  Supervisors  of  counties  of  the  State  appropriating  money  for  the 
support  of  Farm  Bureaus  (some  36  in  number). 

The  correspondence  and  discussion  which  has  resulted  is  of  very  great  im- 
portance to  the  feed  dealer  and  his  business  is  such  that  he  should  bestir 
himself  and  get  behind  the  movement  which  this  association  has  engaged  it- 
self in  to  checkmate  if  possible  the  growing  tendency  of  the  Agricultural 
Department  of  not  only  the  Federal  Government,  but  of  this  State,  to  en- 
courage co-operative  buying  of  farm  commodities  at  wholesale,  or  the  elimi- 
nation of  the  retail  dealer. 

This  association  is  arranging  a  program  which  will  include  a  representative 
of  the  Department  at  Washington,  the  Commissioner  of  Agriculture  of  this 
State,  Director  of  Farm  Bureaus,  M.  C.  Burritt,  and  others  who  will  address 
the  convention  along  the  lines  of  the  subject  above  mentioned. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  we  shall  have  a  clearer  expression  from  the  men 
who  have  control  over  the  Farm  Bureau  proposition  of  their  position  and  to 
what  extent  it  may  be  the  purpose  of  the  various  departments  to  go  in  using 
the  Farm  Bureau  to  curtail  or  interfere  with  legitimate  business. 

As  an  indication  of  the  kind  of  talk  we  may  expect  to  hear,  I  am  enclos- 
ing aj  copy  of  letter  received  today  from  M.  C.  Burritt,  Director  of  Farm 
Bureaus  of  this  State,  accepting  your  invitation  to  address  the  convention. 
Please  treat  this  confidential. 

We  feel  that  this  meeting  will  be  of  such  vital  importance  that  every 
dealer  in  the  State  should  put  aside  other  matters  and  attend  the  conven- 
tion and  thus  express  our  united  opposition  to  the  present  influence  of  the 
Farm  Bureau,  for  there  sure  will  be  some  live  discussion. 

We  want  to  serve  notice  that  some  2,000  to  3,000  dealers  of  the  State  do 
not  propose  to  stand  for  a  proposition  that  we  are  helping  to  support  which 
seems  to  have  a  purpose  to  undermine  our  business. 

Now  my  purpose  in  writing  you  this  and  giving  you  these  advices  is,  that 
the  Executive  Committee  believe  it  most  essential  that  the  local  associations 
get  busy  and  begin  a  campaign  immediately  to  secure  the  largest  attendance 
possible  at  the  Albany  convention  of  this  association.  It  would  seem  that 
every  dealer  ought  to  feel  it  a  duty  to  help  to  make  the  attendance  so  large 
that  these  men  who  will  speak  cannot  fail  to  recognize  that  we  resent  this 
Federalized  or  State  Bureau  and  that  we  intend  to  fight  it. 

The  Governor  of  the  State  has  also  been  invited  to  attend  and  address 
the  convention. 

Program  and  notices  of  the  convention  will  be  mailed  later. 

Trusting  you  will  take  the  matter  up  at  once  in  your  association  and 
awaiting  your  reply  that  you  will  do  so,  I  beg  to  remain, 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


809 

CLOVER  LEAF  MILLING  CO. 

Millers  and  Manufacturers  of 

CLOVER  LEAF  FEEDS. 
D.  B.  FRASEB,  President. 
W.  H.   KEENEY,  Secretary  and  Treasurer. 
F.  C.  GREUTKEB,  Sales  Manager. 

Mills  and  Office 

Ontario  St.  and  Cloverdale  Road, 
Buffalo,   N.   Y. 

321  BRANDYWINE  AVE.,  SCHENECTADY,  N.  Y.,  April  27,  1916. 

Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Secretary,  N.   Y.  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 
Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

My  Dear  King. —  I  have  yours  of  the  26th  and  note  copies  of  letters  from 
M.  C.  Burritt,  B.  S.  Mead  and  A.  J.  Nicholl.  You  will  note  that  they  sub- 
stantially confirm  my  statement  made  before  the  dealers'  meeting  at  Bing- 
hamton.  You  will  remember  that  my  statement  was  partly  from  what  was 
told  me  by  Robert  Nicholl,  the  dealer  there,  and  partly  my  conversation 
with  the  Farm  Bureau  agent  whom  I  believe  was  T.  M.  Avery.  I  cannot 
vouch  for  what  Mr.  Nicholls  told  me,  but  will  vouch  for  the  correctness  in 
what  Mr.  Avery  said  to  me.  I  think  I  remember  that  this  matter  aroused 
such  indignation  in  Delaware  county  that  Mr.  Avery,  when  his  year  expired 
and  the  matter  of  employing  him  again  was  brought  before  the  Board  of 
Supervisors,  was  asked  to  appear  at  the  Board  meeting,  and  a  resolution  was 
passed  instructing  him  to  keep  his  hands  off  of  purchasing  feed,  and  he  was 
told  that  he  would  be  dropped  unless  he  did  so. 

If  you  will  write  Crawford  Bros.,  Hamden,  N.  Y.,  I  believe  they  can  give 
you  full  information  as  to  what  the  Board  of  Supervisors  actually  did  and 
said,  as  I  remember  their  telling  one  about  it,  and  I  also  suggest  that  you 
write  Robert  Nicholls,  Roxbury,  and  get  his  statement  of  what  occurred  when 
Mr.  Avery  and  Mr.  Nicholl  called  at  his  office.  It  looks  to  me  as  if  this 
man  Burritt  was  begging  the  point  when  he  claims  that  these  people  never 
saw  the  feed  or  handled  the  money,  because  my  statement  at  Binghamton 
was  not  to  that  effect. 

It  looks  to  me  as  if  all  this  will  do  a  lot  of  good  as  showing  Mr.  Burritt 
that  the  feed  dealers  of  New  York  State  do  not  propose  to  have  these  mat- 
ters go  on  without  a  very  vigorous  protest. 

I  am  not  in  a  position  at  present  to  get  any  more  information  myself  than 
I  have  given  you,  or  showed  you  where  to  get  it. 

With  kindest  personal  regards,  I  beg  to  remain, 

Yours  very  truly, 

L.  S.  SCHELL. 


810 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  March  13,  1916. 
M.  J.  MUDGE,  Treasurer,  Afton,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Mr.  Mudge. —  Yours  of  the  9th  with  enclosure  received  and  noted. 
I  have  seen  this  man  over  at  Morrisville  Agricultural  School. 

We  received  inquiry  from  M.  C.  Burritt,  Director  of  Farm  Bureaus  of  the 
State,  stating  he  had  been  informed  that  at  our  recent  meeting  statements 
were  made  that  County  Farm  Bureau  Agents  had  sold  feed,  etc.,  on  commis- 
sion and  asking  if  the  facts  could  be  substantiated,  also  requesting  copy  of 
resolutions  which  he  said  he  had  heard  were  adopted  at  this  meeting. 

Have  written  him  giving  him  the  statement  made  by  Mr.  Schell  at  Bing- 
hamton  in  relation  to  the  matter.  Mr.  Schell  said  he  had  no  objection  what- 
ever to  our  giving  same  to  him. 

I  hope  you  won't  have  much  trouble  with  direct  selling  for  it  is  an  awful 
nuisance.  The  only  thing  we  can  do  is  to  keep  banging  away  at  those  who 
do  it  and  we  certainly  have  some  good  friends. 

Look  out  for  the  J.  E.  Bartlett  Co.,  Jackson,  Mich.  If  you  handle  Bull's 
Eye  Mixed  Feed  made  by  Blish  Milling  Co.,  you  may  say  they  are  selling  to 
co-operative  companies.  Wagar  and  Barringer  of  Philadelphia  are  good. 

Am  enclosing  copy  of  the  resolutions)  adopted  at  the  Binghamton  meeting. 

Yours  sincerely, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  29,   1915. 
Mr.  CHAS.  YOUNG,  Mohawk,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Am  enclosing  copy  of  letter  received  from  Kernper  Mill  &  Ele- 
vator Co.,  in  relation  to  car  you  reported  which  went  to  Jordanville. 

Now  this  is  rather  of  an  evasive  reply  to  my  letter  and  I  am  going  after 
them  again  today. 

In  the  meantime  is  there  any  way  you  could  learn  of  the  name  of  the 
"other  concern"  which  is  of  course  some  jobber? 

I  have  a  notion  it  is  some  of  those  Buffalo  fellows,  but  of  course  may  be 
wrong.  If  it  is,  would  like  to  put  it  up  to  the  Kemper  people  good  and 
proper  as  we  have  some  of  them  on  the  run,  especially  Traders  &  Producers 
and  Nowak;  and  there  is  another  concern  there,  too,  Globe  Elevator,  who  are 
up  to  the  same  kind  of  business.  We  are  after  them  now. 

Look  out  for  Listman,  La  Crosse,  Wis.,  and  Bartlett  Co.  of  Jackson,  Mich., 
also  H.  O.  Company,  Buffalo. 

If  there  is  any  chance  of  ferreting  out  the  jobber  through  whom  Kemper 
placed  the  car  at  Jordanville,  it  will  be  a  great  help. 

Yours, 

H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


811 

WATEBTILLE,  N.  Y.,  April  26,  1916. 
Messrs.  C.  W.  WAGAB  &  Co.,  534-540  Bourse  Building,  Philadelphia,  Pa,.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  beg  to  acknowledge  receipt  of  your  kind  favor  of  the  24th 
and  am  very  much  interested  in  the  attached  copy  of  your  letter  to  Mr. 
Keegan,  also  his  reply.  The  matter  has  resulted  just  about  as  I  expected  it 
would  and  as  I  insinuated  in  my  previous  letter.  I  am  sending  the  same  on 
to  Mr.  Carrier  tonight  for  his  information. 

I  wish  to  say  further  that  I  attended  a  meeting  of  the  Herkimer  County 
Association  yesterday  and,  believe  me,  I  gave  vent  to  my  opinion  along  the 
lines  that  you  have  often  suggested,  that  dealers  should  let  those  jobbers 
alone  who  sell  direct  in  one  place  and  to  the  dealer  in  another  and  I  advo- 
cated very  strongly  standing  by  the  jobbers  who  were  in  sympathy  with  us. 

I  also  took  occasion  to  particularly  mention  your  name  and  your  attitude 
and  read  the  recent  letter  you  wrote  me  in  regard  to  the  Liberty  matter  so 
that  you  may  appreciate  that  I,  as  before  stated,  am  continually  trying  to 
work  for  your  interest,  as  well  as  other  straight  jobbers. 

Trusting  this  will  meet  with  your  approval,  I  beg  to  remain, 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

P.  S. —  Please  add  to  the  list  of  members  of  this  association  the  following 
names:  P.  W.  Floyd,  Crown  Point  Centre,  N.  Y.;  E.  T.  &  J.  G.  Wilcox,  Har- 
ford,  N.  Y.;  R.  K  Dershimer,  Dryden,  N.  Y.,  and  J.  W.  Best,  Herkimer,  N.  Y. 


WATERVH.LE,  N.  Y.,  Mwrch  20,  1916. 
Mr.  Jos.   BAUMERT,  Antwerp,  N.   Y.: 

Dear  Sir — Mr  George  Southwell  'phoned  me  this  morning  to  mail  you 
application  blanks  as  you  wished  to  join  the  State  Association. 

I  am  very  glad  to  enclose  same  herein  and  assure  you  your  interest  in  our 
work  and  desire  to  help  along  by  becoming  a  member  of  the  association  is 
appreciated. 

We  are  helping  the  boys  out  in  all  parts  of  the  State  and  have,  as  you 
are  probably  aware,  succeeded  in  eliminating  a  very  substantial  amount  of 
direct  selling. 

Manufacturers  and  jobbers  are  investigating  very  carefully  now  as  to  the 
status  of  those  requesting  quotations  and  endeavoring  to  buy  direct. 

You  would  be  surprised  to  see  the  correspondence  that  comes  to  this  office 
from  firms  who  have  been  solicited  to  sell  direct.  This  surely  represents  a 
very  different  situation  from  that  of  a  year  or  even  six  months  ago  when 
practically  anyone  who  could  pay  a  draft  could  buy  a  car  of  feed  or  grain. 

I  think  the  dealers  in  the  northern  part  of  the  State  can  testify  as  to  re- 
sults obtained  through  the  medium  of  this  association. 

As  are  keeping  dealers  and  local  associations  posted  continually  so  that  it 
is  pretty  hard  for  any  concern  to  get  by  with  direct  sales  without  being  re- 
ported to  dealers  all  over  the  State. 

If  we  can  be  of  service  to  you,  command  us. 

Awaiting  your  reply,  I  beg  to  remain, 

Respectfully, 
(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


812 

THE  CORTLAND  HOUSE 

N.  A.  SMITH  Co.,  Props. 

Carlton  Hotel, 

Binghamton, 
on  Saturday  Morning. 

COBTLAND,  N.  Y.,  October  27,  1915. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville: 

Dear  Sir. —  In  enclose  you  a  circular  letter  of  W.  A.  Holman  &  Sons  of 
Ithaca,  which  speaks  for  itself. 

I  spent  nine  hours  today  talking  N.  Y.  State  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  and 
the  cash  basis,  and  have  won  over  the  following  firms: 
W.  A.  Holman  &  Sons,  Ithaca, 
H.  L.  Fish,  South  Cauga  St.,  Ithaca, 
J.  B.  Thayer,  32  West  State  St.,  Ithaca. 

These  three  firms  are  anxious  to  go  on  the  cash  basis  and  Holman  has  de- 
cided, as  per  letter.  Thayer  wants  to  do  it,  and  will  now  go  ahead,  but  he 
was  not  aware  of  the  workings  of  the  State  organization  and  the  manufac- 
turers, so  I  had  to  explain  and  also  talk  ".Cash  Basis/*  I  am  certain  that  if 
you  take  up  the  matter  of  their  joining  the  State  Association  they  will  do 
so,  as  they  are  having  trouble  with  Chapin  &  Co.  supplying  direct  and  were 
not  aware  of  your  work  in  helping  them. 

Get  after  them.    I  have  told  them  you  would  do  so. 

Also  Thayer  would  like  some  more  information  on  the  cash  problem,  as 
they  have  a  firm  holding-out  named: 

Mandeville  Bros,  of  S.  Cayuga  St. 

Mr.  Holman  will  write  you,  I  expect,  but  I  told  them  I  would  advise  you 
myself.  ^ 

Yours  truly, 

ERNEST  A.  WEBB. 


WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  October  28,  1915. 
Mr.  H.  L.  FISH,  Ithaca,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  I  am  in  receipt  of  a  letter  from  Mr.  E.  A.  Webb,  representing 
Edwards  &  Loomis,  of  Chicago,  stating  he  had  been  in  conversation  with 
you  regarding  a  prospect  of  the  dealers  in  Ithaca  adopting  the  cash  system 
of  trade  and  stating  that  one  dealer  there  is  to  put  the  system  into  opera- 
tion November  1st. 

I  congratulate  that  dealer  for  taking  the  step  and  you  also  if  you  have 
the  same  under  consideration.  All  it  requires  is  a  little  nerve  and  backbone. 

You  may  not  be  aware  of  the  fact  that  the  Cash  System  is  being  adopted 
by  dealers  all  over  the  State. 

There  are  some  fifteen  counties)  or  more  in  the  (State  now  that  have  local 
county  associations  and  the  majority  of  them  have  adopted  this  system, 
while  in  every  part  of  the  State  elsewhere  there  are  many  dealers  who  are 
individually  following  the  same  lines  and  others  following. 

Now,  the  State  Association  is  in  touch  with  all  these  loeal  association*;  in 
fact,  tries  to  keep  in  touch  with  all  the  dealers  and  we  have  a  very  large 
mailing  list,  but  I  find  that  we  have  overlooked  you  in  some  way  as  your  firm 


813 

has  not  been  on  the  list,  which  I  very  much  regret.  I  wish  you  would  give 
me  the  names  of  all  dealers  in  Ithaca  so  that  hereafter  we  will  have  it  cor- 
rect. 

Now,  I  supposed  that  all  dealers  knew  of  this  organization  and  its  pur- 
poses, for  we  are  trying  to  be  a  live  wire  organization  for  the  benefit  of  the 
feed  dealer  and  one  of  the  things  we  are  devoting  our  activities  to  at  the 
present  time  and  for  some  time  past,  is  the  elimination  of  direct  selling,  and 
let  me  say  we  are  fighting  it  hard. 

We  have  a  strong  ally  in  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Association 
and  I  presume  Mr.  Webb  gave  you  some  information  as  to  the  close  co-opera- 
tion between  this  and  our  own  State  organization. 

We  believe  that  we  can  eliminate  the  evil  of  direct  selling,  but  we  want  and 
must  have  the  support  of  the  dealers,  for  I  think  you  will  admit  that  to  im- 
press some  manufacturers  and  jobbers  who  yet  cannot  withstand  the  temp- 
tation to  sell  a  consumer  under  the  legitimate  dealer's  head,  we  must  have 
the  unqualified  support  of  every  individual  dealer. 

At  our  last  convention  the  resolution  hereto  attached  was  adopted  and  in 
co-operation  with  all  local  associations  in  the  State,  we  are  going  after 
those  concerns  who  are  indulging  in  direct  selling  to  the  consumer  whenever 
a  case  is  reported  to  us  and  we  are  accomplishing  splendid  results. 

It  has  taken  a  long  time  to  get  the  dealers  awakened  to  the  need  of  this 
association  and  to  the  fact  that  we  were  really  doing  something.  This  has 
all  been  proven  and  now  it  ought  to  appear  to  any  dealer  that  it  is  worth 
while  to  put  his  shoulder  to  the  wheel  and  help  do  more. 

I  am  enclosing  application  blank  and  would  be  very  glad  to  have  you  fill 
it  out  and  return  to  'me  and  at  the  same  time  if  you  have  a  case  of  direct 
selling  in  mind,  don't  hesitate  to  advise  us  and  will  be  glad  to  take  it  up  for 
you. 

An  association  can  do  more  than  an  individual  in  such  instances. 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  .Secretary. 

Storehouse  near  W.  S.  Depot. 
POTTER  &  TRACY 
COAL,  LUMBER,  FLOUR  AND  FEED, 
LATH  AND  SHINGLES 

FAYETTEVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  23,  1915. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  are  going  to  adopt  the  cash  pay  idea  in  selling  feed  and 
Mr.  W.  M.  Jones,  of  this  place,  tells  us  you  have  conducted  a  cash  feed  busi- 
ness for  a  time,  and  perhaps  could  give  us  some  pointers  regarding  the  sys- 
tem you  used.  Any  information  given  will  be  thankfully  received  and  ap- 
preciated. 

Awaiting  your  reply,  we  are, 

Yours  very  truly, 

POTTER  &  TRACY. 


814 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  24,  1915, 
Messrs.  POSTER  &  TRACY,  Fayetteville,  2S7.  Y.: 

Gentlemen: — Replying  to  yours  of  (he  23d.  Glad  to  know  you  are  to 
adopt  the  Cash  System.  It  is  going  all  over  the  State  about  as  fast  as  pos- 
sible. At  Auburn  and  Ithaca  all  the  dealers  adopted  it  the  other  day. 

I  enclose  copy  of  letter  we  sent  our  trade,  also  one  a  dealer  down  in  Groton 
used,  which  please  return.  These  will  give  you  an  idea  of  the  way  it  is  an- 
nounced. About  all  letters  cover  practically  the  same  ground. 

We  simply  require  cash  for  everything  in  the  feed  and  grain  line  at  the 
mill,  except  public  institutions  and  Corporations  and  absentee  landlords, 
which  we  give  a  limited  time  to  audit  bills  and  send  check. 

Everyone  understands  it  now  and  we  don't  have  to  explain.  If  someone 
happens  to  come  without  their  pocket-book,  why  we  let  them  have  the  stuff, 
but  understood  that  they  must  bring  the  money  next  time  down.  They  don't 
forget  now  and  really  don't  have  any  trouble  about  it.  Got  to  use  a  little 
judgment,  that's  all. 

Don't  know  of  anyone  going  back  to  the  old  system  after  once  adopting 
cash. 

Some  say  it  can't  be  done  in  a  town  where  all  the  dealers  do  not  come  in. 
It  can,  if  a  dealer  has  a  little  nerve,  but  that's  up  to  him.  Know  of  lots  of 
cases  where  after  one  has  adopted  cash,  they  all  come  in  later,  as  the  first 
fellow  is  getting  the  cash  trade  and  they  the  credit.  Usually  drop  the  prices 
about  a  dollar  a  ton,  but  guess  most  get  back  to  the  former  margin  of  profit 
after  a  while. 

If  anyone  comes  in  and  sells  direct,  let  us  know  and  we  will  go  after  them. 
We  are  having  splendid  success  in  cutting  it  out. 

Had  a  letter  from  a  dealer  last  night,  saying  he  could  not  see  that  he  had 
lost  any  business  by  cash  system;  on  the  other  hand,  had  plenty  of  money. 

One  dealer  at  Herkimer  has  collected  in  $19,000  and  invested  it  and  has 
plenty  now  besides  to  run  his  business. 

This  is  about  the  run  of  reports.  Therefore,  I  do  not  see  why  it  is  not 
good  business  to  adopt  Cash  System. 

Yours  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEEVILLE,  N.  Y.,  July  21,  1915. 
Mr,  GEO.  S.  UTLEY,  Pulaski,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Please  accept  my  thanks  for  yours  of  the  15th,  also  my  con- 
gratulations over  the  arrival  of  the  lO^-pound  boy  at  your  house.  I  can 
imagine  just  how  proud  you  were  the  morning  of  his  arrival,  for  I  have  ex- 
perienced that  same  feeling  on  two  occasions. 

I  am  very  glad  to  know  that  so  many  of  the  members  have  concluded  to 
adopt  the  cash  system  and  no  doubt  all  will  come  to  the  same  conclusion  in 
a  matter  of  time. 

We  had  a  very  enjoyable  time  at  Jamestown  and  their  convention  was  a 
great  success.  The  manufacturers  from  the  West,  who  were  in  Utica,  all 
came  on  with  some  others.  There  is  a  movement  on  foot  now  to  hold  the 


815 

annual  convention  of  the  American  Feed  Manufacturers'  Association,  the  New 
York  State  Association  and  the  Mutual  Millers  and  Feed  Dealers'  Associa- 
tion at  Buffalo  next  year  all  at  the  same  time.  It  sure  looks  as  if  we  had 
the  co-operation  of  the  manufacturers  and  things  are  going  to  come  our  way 
I  believe. 

With  very  kind  regards,  I  beg  to  remain, 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

Win.  Darlin.  H.  J.  Wood. 

DARLIN  &  WOOD 

Wholesale  and  Retail, 

Flour,  Feed,  Meal,  Grain,  Hay  and  Coal. 

Custom  Grinding  a  Specialty. 

BAINBRIDGE,  N.  Y.,  November  Sth,  1915. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  W^e  have  a  case  of  direct  selling  which  we  would  like  to  refer 
to  you  and  thought  perhaps  you  might  be  able  to  help  us  out. 

The  name  of  the  firm  from  which  they  are  buying  is  Powell  &  Co.,  443-445 
The  Bourse,  Philadelphia,  Pa.  The  farmers  are  buying  under  the  name  of 
John  Wildi  Evaporated  Milk  Co. 

The  bill  of  lading  is  at  the  bank,  but  the  ear  has  not  arrived  yet  and  if 
there  could  be  some  way  of  getting  next  to  the  firm  mentioned  and  cancel, 
if  possible,  if  not  have  the  car  diverted  so  that  the  farmers  will  not  get  the 
habit. 

We  are  also  writing  the  firm  to  see  if  they  will  divert  the  car  to  us. 

Thanking  you  in  advance  for  whatever  you  may  be  able  to  do  for  us. 

Yours  very  truly, 

DARLIN  &  WOOD. 


WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  8th,  1915. 

UARLIN  &  WOOD,  Bainbridge,  N.  Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  Your  special  delivery  letter  only  received  by  me  tonight  on 
my  return  from  a  funeral  at  Oneida. 

Now  I  hasten  to  ask  if  you  cannot  find  from  the  bill  of  lading  of  the  car 
that  Powell  &  Co.  have  sold  there  who  the  actual  shipper  is  and  the  stuff  in 
the  car. 

Powell  &  Co.  arc  jobbers  in  Philadelphia  and  we  know  their  reputation 
and  the  way  to  get  at  them  is  through  the  shipper  or  manufacturer  of  the 
goods. 

We  had  a  case  where  they  had  sold  Douglass  Gluten  to  a  co-operative 
company  and  we  went  after  Douglass  &  Co.  and  they  notified  Powell  &  Co. 
that  they  would  not  stand  for  it  and  that  they  must  cut  it  out  on  their  goods 
or  they  would  take  their  account  away  from  them.  We  have  copy  of  the 
letter  here  now  that  Douglass  wrote  them. 


816 

We  haven't  much  use  for  Powell  &  Co.,  but  we  can  and  have  been  getting 
results  from  manufacturers  that  are  splendid  and  I  only  wish  you  could  see 
some  of  the  mass  of  correspondence  that  has  passed  since  the  Utica  meet 
ing. 

I  will  write  Powell  £  Co.,  however,  but  we  expect,  as  above  mentioned,  to 
get  more  satisfaction  from  the  manufacturer  who  furnished  the  car.  Will 
also  place  the  matter  in  H.  R.  Wilburs,  Secretary  of  the  Mutual  Millers  and 
Feed  Dealers'  Association,  as  we  are  working  very  closely  on  all  these  mat- 
ters, keeping  in  touch  by  letter  and  copies  of  correspondence  practically  every 
day. 

I  wish  the  dealers  all  over  the  State  could  realize  the  work  that  is  being 
done  by  this  association  —  seems  as  if  every  mother's  son  of  them  would  be 
glad  to  become  members  and  help  it  along. 

We  are  figuring  now  to  call  a  meeting  of  our  Executive  Committee  very 
soon  with  one  or  two  officers  of  every  local  association  in  the  State  and 
there  are  now  some  eighteen  counties  organized,  so  as  to  lay  before  them  all 
the  correspondence  with  different  concerns  as  to  direct  selling.  This,  you 
see,  will  have  a  widespread  bearing  and  I  can  assure  you  some  of  them  are 
very  anxious  not  to  incur  the  ill  will  of  the  dealers. 

Am  writing  this  myself  tonight  as  the  young  lady  is  not  here  evenings 
and  want  to  get  this  off  first  mail  in  morning  to  you. 

Please  excuse  errors  and  believe  me  ready  to  do  everything  possible  to 
help  the  dealers.  Have  aways  believed  in  this  association  and  do  now  more 
than  ever. 

Awaiting  your  reply,  I  am, 

Respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING. 


WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  12,  1915. 
Messrs.  DARLIN  &  WOOD,  Bainbridge,  N.  Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  am  enclosing  herewith  copy  of  letter  received  from  Powell 
&  Co.  this  morning. 

Our  taking  these  matters  up  immediately  certainly  has  a  good  effect  and 
I  shall  write  Powell  &  Co.  further  in  regard  to  the  matter. 

We  are  sending  out  notices  today  for  the  meeting  of  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee at  Syracuse,  Thursday,  November  18th,  at  the  Yates  Hotel  at  10 
o'clock  to  continue  throughout  the  day  and  if  you  find  it  convenient  to  be 
present  would  suggest  that  you  do  so,  as  we  would  like  a  very  large  repre- 
sentation of  dealers  so  that  all  can  keep  posted  on  what  is  doing. 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

Dictated  but  not  re-read. 


817 

WATERVELLE,  N.  Y.,  November  9,  1915. 
POWELL  &  Co.,  443-445   The  Bourse,  Philadelphia,  Pa.: 

Gentlemen. —  This  office  is  in  receipt  of  information  from  one  of  the  mem- 
bers of  this  association,  a  legitimate  retail  dealer  at  Bainbridge,  N.  Y.,  that 
you  have  sold  a  carload  of  feed  direct  to  farmers  at  that  point,  the  car  now 
being  in  transit. 

I  beg  to  advise  that  this  Association  is  endeavoring  to  use  its  good  offices 
to  bring  pressure  to  bear  upon  the  manufacturer  and  jobber  to  eliminate 
the  practice  of  direct  selling. 

We  are  taking  this  matter  up  with  you  in  a  perfectly  frank  and  friendly 
manner,  desiring  to  call  to  your  attention  the  fact  that  the  dealers  of  New 
York  State  are  very  strongly  organized  and  are  bitter  in  their  opposition  to 
this  direct  selling  evil,  which  I  think  you  must  yourselves  admit  is  an  injus- 
tice to  the  legitimate  dealer  who  is  obliged  to  maintain  an  establishment  to 
do  business  and  supply  the  needs  of  his  community. 

I  am  advised  that  if  you  see  fit  to  divert  the  car  in  question  before  its 
arrival  for  the  farmers,  that  the  firm  of  Darlin  &  Wood,  of  Bainbridge,  N.  Y., 
would  be  willing  to  take  the  car  in  and  pay  for  it. 

By  taking  the  matter  up  with  this  firm  direct  I  think  you  will  have  no 
trouble  whatever  in  placing  the  car  through  the  proper  channel  and  which 
I  can  assure  you  will  meet  with  the  approval  of  a  large  body  of  dealers  in 
New  York  State. 

I  would  also  like  to  have  the  pleasure  of  a  reply  stating  your  policy 
as  to  direct  selling  and  if  it  is  your  purpose  to  continue  along  these  lines  or 
protect  the  legitimate  dealer. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

POWELL   &   COMPANY 

Shippers  of  Mill   Feeds  and   Grains 
443  and  445  Bourse  Building 

PHILADELPHIA,  PA.,  November  11,   1915. 

Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Secretary,  N.  Y.  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 
Water  wile,  New  York: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  have  your  letter  of  the  9th,  in  reference  to  the  car  of  feed 
that  we  sold  to  the  John  Wildi  Evaporated  Milk  Co.,  at  Bainbridge,  N.  Y. 
We  also  have  a  letter  from  Darlin  &  Wood  in  reference  to  this  car,  and 
Ave  have  written  them  that  if  they  can  make  arrangements  with  the  manager 
of  the  John  Wildi  Evaporated  Milk  Co.  to  take  care  of  the  car  it  will 
be  satisfactory  to  us.  We  have  a  contract  with  them,  however,  and  must 
fulfill  it,  otherwise  we  will  be  liable  for  damages. 

We  never  have,  and  never  intend  to  make  a  practice  of  selling  to  the 
farmers,  but  when  we  sold  this  car  we  did  not  understand  the  conditions  as 
they  exist  up  there.  We  understood  that  the  John  Wildi  Evaporated  Milk 
Co.  was  a  concern  something  like  the  Hershey  Chocolate  Co.  here  in  Penna. 
\vlio  have  a  regular  incorporated  feed  department. 


818 

We  are  glad  that  you  and  Darlin  &  Wood  have  taken  this  matter  up  with 
U8,  and  assure  you  that  we  do  not  intend  to  sell  them  in  the  future,  now 
that  wo  know  they  are  not  a  regular  incorporated  feed  concern.  We  do 
considerable  business  with  some  of  your  members  and  it  would  not  pay  us  to 
take  a  chance  of  selling  the  farmer  direct. 

We  would  appreciate  if  you  could  throw  some  business  our  way,  and  hope 
that  Darlin  &  \Vood  can  make  arrangements  with  the  manager  of  the  John 
Wildi  Co.  to  take  care  of  this  car  of  feed,  and  we  certainly  are  sorry  that 
we  sold  same. 

We  trust  you  appreciate  our  position  in  the  matter,  and  awaiting  your 
reply,  we  remain 

Very  truly  yours, 

POWELL  &  COMPANY, 
By  C.  ROBT.  BEAN. 


Win.  Darlin.  H.  J.  Wood. 

DARLIN  &  WOOD 

Wholesale  and   Retail 

Flour,    Feed,    Meal,    Grain,    Hay    and    Coal 
Custom  Grinding  a  Specialty 

BAINBBIDGE,  N.  Y.  ^November  13th,  1915. 
H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. — -Your  letter  received,  we  would  hasten  to  reply  that  we  have 
been  corresponding  with  Powel  &  Co.  concerning  the  matter  and  they  tell  us 
that  they  did  not  understand  the  situation  here,  and  that  they  will  ship  no 
more  to  them. 

The  car  that  they  shipped  is  Elmco  Bran,  have  been  trying  to  get  the  car 
diverted  to  us  but  cannot  seem  to  get  any  satisfactory  results.  Powell  &  Co. 
are  willing  but  have  made  the  contract  and  claim  that  they  will  be  obliged  to 
fulfill  it.  Can  you  see  any  way? 

Have  been  away  or  would  have  answered  more  promptly.  Thanking  you 
for  your  interest  in  the  matter,  we  remain 

Yours  very  truly, 
D&W/MW  DARLIN  &  WOOD. 

WATERVILLE,  N.   Y.,   November   16,   1915. 
Messrs.   DARLIN  &  WOOD,   Bainbridge,   N.   Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  Replying  to  yours  of  the  13th  inst.  Don't  see  how  you 
can  prevent  the  car  in  question  arriving  and  being  delivered. 

Hope,  however,  that  Powell  &  Co.  will  live  up  to  the  sentiments  expressed 
in  their  letter. 

I  would  like  to  know  if,  a«  you  say,  this  car  contains  Elnico  bran,  whether 
the  Listman  Milling  Company  have  had  an  established  trade  in  your  town 
or  vicinity  on  Elmco  Bran  or  their  other  feeds  and  flour  and  if  their  goods 
are  being  sold  there  now. 


81ft 

We  are  having  some  correspondence  with  them  and  would  like  to  fce  posted 
in  such  matters,  as  their  secretary  is  quite  an  arbitrary  person  in  regard 
to  their  position  relative  to  direct  selling. 

Yours  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  19,  1915. 
POWELL  &  Co.,  443  Bourse  Building,  Philadelphia,  Pa.  : 

Gentlemen. —  Replying  to  yours  of  the  llth  inst.,  I  beg  to  thank  you  for 
the  position  you  take  in  the  matter  at  Bainbridge  and  the  assurances  that 
you  will  discontinue  selling  them  in  the  future,  also  your  position  in  not 
selling  to  farmers  direct. 

We  also  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  two  other  direct-selling  propositions, 
the  granges  and  co-operative  companies,  that  the  legitimate  dealers  in  the 
State  are  opposed  to,  and  as  both  these  agencies  amount  to  the  same  thing 
as  selling  farmers  direct,  would  suggest  that  you  let  us  have  an  expression 
as  to  your  policy  towards  supplying  them. 

Of  course,  it  was  impossible  for  Darlin  &  Wood  to  make  any  kind  of  an 
arrangement  to  take  over  the  car  shipped  there  to  the  milk  company. 

Again  thanking  you  and  awaiting  the  favor  of  a  reply,  I  am 

Respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

POWELL  &  COMPANY 

Shippers  of  Mill   Feeds   and  Grain 

443  and  445  Bourse  Building 

PHILADELPHIA,  PA.,  November  27,  1915. 

M.   H.  M.   KING,  Secretary,   N.   Y.   State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association, 
Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  have  your  letter  of  the  19th.  We  did  the  best  we  could 
to  enable  Darlin  &  Wood  to  make  arrangements  to  take  over  the  car  of  feed 
shipped  to  the  John  Wildi  Milk  Co.,  at  Bainbridge,  but  they  insisted  that  we 
fill  our  contract. 

In  reference  to  the  granges  and  co-operative  companies  which  the  legitimate 
dealers  are  opposed  to,  we  will  not  sell  them.  We  have  been  getting  very 
little  business  from  your  members  and  would  appreciate  it  if  you  would 
put  our  name  before  them  and  ask  them  to  give  us  a  share  of  their 
business,  providing,  of  course,  our  prices  are  in  line.  Any  inquiries  which 
we  may  get  from  the,  milk  company  at  Bainbridge  we  will  refer  to  Darlin  & 
Wood. 

We  have  tried  to  act  fair  in  this  matter  and  think  it  would  be  no  more 
than  right  that  we  get  some  business  from  your  members.  Please  let  us  hear 
from  you. 

Very  truly  yours, 

POWELL  &  COMPANY. 


820 

Wm.  Darlin.  H.  J.  Wood. 

DARLIN  &  WOOD 

Wholesale   and   Retail 

Flour,    Feed,   Meal,    Grain,   Hay  and   Coal 
Custom  Grinding  a  Specialty 

BAINBRIDGE,  N.  Y.,  December  2,9th,   1915. 
H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  are  still  having  trouble  with  the  farmers  buying  direct 
through  Mr.  H.  H.  Lyon,  a  farmer  who  we  are  unable  to  do  anything  with. 
He  purchased  a  car  of  Elmco  Bran  and  Middlings  of  the  Listman  Milling  Co. 

We  are  informing  you  in  order  that  you  may  know  what  the  Listman  Mill- 
ing Co.  are  doing  here. 

We  are  very  anxious  to  know  what  the  Association  has  been  able  to  do 
in  regard  to  putting  a  stop  to  this  firm's  selling  direct,  and  would  appreciate 
very  much  if  you  would  keep  us  informed  in  the  matter. 

Thanking  you  in  advance,  we  remain 

Yours  very  truly, 
D&W/MW  DARLIN  &  WOOD. 


WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  December  30,  1915. 
Messrs.   DARLIN  £  WOOD,   Bainbridge,   N.   Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  am  in  receipt  of  yours  of  the  29th,  and  note  that  the 
Listman  Mill  Co.  have  shipped  a  car  of  feed  into  your  place  to  H.  H.  Lyon, 
a  farmer. 

You  will  probably  recollect  that  we  had  some  discussion  of  this  Listman 
Mill  Co.  at  the  Syracuse  meeting,  and  they  have  assumed  a  very  arbitrary 
position  in  regard  to  direct  selling;  insist  that  where  they  have  quoted  and 
the  dealer  will  not  handle  their  goods  or  has  handled  them  and  stopped 
handling  them,  they  feel  at  liberty  to  sell  direct,  but  I  will  take  the  matter 
up  with  them  and  let  you  know  later. 

With  very  kind  regards,  I  beg  to  remain 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


821 

WATEBVILLB,  N".  Y.,  February  20,  1916. 
Messrs.  POWELL  &  Co.,  Philadelphia,  Pa.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  am  informed  reliably  that  you  have  sold  and  had  shipped 
into  Canton,  St.  Lawrence  Co.,  N.  Y.,  two  cars  of  bulk  Gluten  Feed  to  an 
association  of  farmers  in  direct  opposition  to  the  legitimate  dealers. 

Inasmuch  as  you  have  indicated  to  us  that  it  was  your  purpose  to  not  in 
any  way  antagonize  the  legitimate  dealer,  I  beg  to  inquire  if  you  have 
changed  your  policy?  If  so,  we  shall  regret  your  stand  very  much  and  I  can 
assure  you  that  the  dealers  in  this  State  are  watching  very  closely  the 
movements  of  those  who  are  selling  direct  to  farmers  and  farmers'  associa- 
tions. 

Awaiting  your  reply,  I  beg  to  remain 

Respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  March  8,  1916. 
POWELL  &  COMPANY,  The  Bourse,  Philadelphia,  Pa.: 
Gentlemen. —  Thanks  for  yours  of  the  6th  inst. 
Sorry  to  learn  you  are  closing  out  your  business. 
I  understand  you  are  to  be  succeeded  by  H.  U.  Bean  &  Co. 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M,  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  March  6,  1916. 
DOUGLASS  Co.,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa: 

Gentlemen. —  I  thank  you  for  yours  of  the  2nd  and  3rd  inst.  in  regard  to 
Powell  &  Co.,  also  H.  U.  Bean  &  Co. 

Permit  me  to  say  that  your  many  courtesies  are  appreciated  by  this 
Association. 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  February  29,  1916. 
DOUGLASS  Co.,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa: 

Gentlemen. —  I  regret  to  advise  you  that  I  am  in  receipt  of  reliable  and 
authentic  information  that  the  firm  of  Powell  &  Co.,  of  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  are 
shipping  Douglass  Gluten  into  Canton,  St.  Lawrence  Co.,  N.  Y.,  to  an  associa- 
tion of  farmers,  known  as  a  Co-operative  Company,  which,  of  course,  is  in 
direct  opposition  to  legitimate  dealers  at  that  place.  We  have  many  dealers 
in  that  vicinity  who  are  members  of  this  Association  who  object  very 
seriously  to  this  business. 

Inasmuch  as  we  have  had  this  matter  up  with  you  in  regard  to  a  similar 
proposition  here  at  Waterville  where  these  same  jobbers  were  shipping  your 
goods,  I  trust  that  you  will  now  take  the  matter  up  very  strong  with  this 
concern  and  put  a  stop  to  their  operations  in  this  line.  I  believe  in  former 


822 

correspondence,  copies  of  which  you  sent  me,  you  expressed  very  plainly  to 
these  people  that  unless  they  cut  out  that  kind  of  business  you  would  not 
permit  them  to  handle  your  goods. 

Thanking  you  for  the  favor  of  a  reply,  I  beg  to  remain 

Respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

DeVer  Rogers.  William  H.  Rogers.. 

J.  DEVER  ROGERS  &  SON 

Shippers  of 
Live  Poultry,  Eggs  and  Poultry  Supplies 

Also  Dealers  in 

Flour,  Feed,  Grain  and  Fertilizer 
OXFORD,  CHENANGO  COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  November  13M>  1915. 

•    (Copy) 
Mr.  A.  P.  HUSBAND,  811  Royal  Insurance  Building,  Chicago,  111.: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  have  a  little  matter  that  we  would  like  to  have  you  take 
up  in  your  official  capacity. 

I  understand  that  the  Listman  Milling  Company,  of  LaCrosse,  Wis.,  are 
members  of  the  Millers'  National  Federation.  Now,  the  Listman  Milling 
Company  keep  sending  their  quotations  and  also  are  selling  feed  direct  to  the 
farmer.  Within  the  last  few  days  they  have  sent  two  carloads  into  this 
town. 

The  New  York  State  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  at  a  meeting  held  at 
Utica,  N.  Y.,  in  June,  1915,  also  all  of  the  local  organizations  of  the  State 
have  adopted  the  following  resolution: 

"Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  this  convention  that  the  members  of 
the  Central  New  York  Feed  Dealers'  Association  do  not  favor  those  feed 
manufacturers  who  persist  in  selling  a  part  of  their  products  through  other 
than  legitimate  jobbers  or  retailers.  That  the  president  and  secretary  of 
this  Association  be  and  are  hereby  instructed  to  use  their  good  offices  in 
carrying  out  the  cause  of  this  resolution." 

You  will  very  plainly  see  how  the  local  feed  dealer  feels  in  regard  to  a 
firm  who  still  persists  in  selling  direct.  The  secretary  took  this  matter  up 
with  the  Listman  Milling  Company,  when  they  first  began  corresponding  with 
one  of  these  parties  as  the  firm  of  which  the  writer  is  a  member  would  have 
sold  both  of  these  cars  of  bran,  and  also  this  firm  has  always  carried  a  stock 
of  their  bran  on  hand,  also  middlings  and  Marvel  flour.  Since  they  still 
persist  in  selling  direct  we  have  been  obliged  under  our  resolution,  to  cut 
out  all  of  their  goods  and  have  substituted  the  Russell  Miller  flour,  etc., 
instead. 

Hoping  that  you  will  use  your  good  offices  to  straighten  out  this  matter,  I 
remain 

Yours  truly, 

CENTRAL  NEW  YORK  FEED  DEALERS'  ASSOCIATION, 
JDR/N  (Signed)     J.  DEVER  ROGERS,  President. 


823  "* 

J.  DeVer  Rogers.  William  H.  Rogers. 

J.  DEVER  ROGERS  &  SON 

Shippers  of 
Live  Poultry,  Eggs  and  Poultry  Supplies 

Also  Dealers  in 

Flour,  Feed,  Grain  and  Fertilizer 

OXFORD,  CHENANGO  COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  November  13th,  1915. 
Mr.  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Enclosed  please  find  copy  of  a  letter  this  morning  received 
from  Mr.  L.  F.  Brown.  I  have  answered  same  to  Mr.  Husband,  giving  him  the 
resolutions  adopted  by  the  meeting  at  Utica,  N.  Y.,  also  the  resolution 
adopted  by  the  Central  New  York  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association.  Also 
copy  of  my  letter  to  him. 

Thanking  you  for  past  favors, 

Yours  truly, 
JDR/N  J.  DEVER  ROGERS. 

DeVer  Rogers.  William  H.  Rogers. 

J.  DEVER  ROGERS  &  Sox 

Shippers  of 
Live  Poultry,  Eggs  and  Poultry  Supplies 

Also  Dealers  in 

Flour,  Feed,  Grain  and  Fertilizer 
OXFORD,  CHENANGO  COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  November  3rd,  1915. 

Mr.    H.    M.    KING,   Secretary,   New   York    State   Feed   Dealers'    Association, 
Waterville,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Quite  a  while  ago  the  Listman  Milling  Company  sent  direct 
quotations  into  this  town  to  a  farmer,  offering  him  their  goods  at  the  same 
price  and  less  than  they  were  offering  it  to  us.  These  farmers  came  to 
our  place  asking  for  quotations  and  when  we  gave  them  to  them  they 
informed  us  that  they  could  buy  from  the  Listman  Milling  Company  for 
$1.00  and  more  less  than  we  were  asking  them.  I  took  up  the  matter  with 
the  Listman  Milling  Company,  sending  them  the  resolutions  drawn  up  at 
St.  Louis,  the  resolutions  adopted  at  Utica  and  the  resolutions  adopted  by  the 
Chenango  Valley  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  but  nevertheless,  they  sold  this 
party  a  car  of  bran.  To-day  another  car  of  bran  came  in  for  the  first  man's 
neighbor,  making  two  cars  sold  by  the  Listman  Milling  Company. 

I  wrote  to  Mr.  Carrier  a  while  ago  and  he  said  that  I  was  taking  the 
right  course.  I  informed  the  Listman  Milling  Company  that  if  they  sold 
this  car  of  bran  without  sending  the  commission  to  one  of  the  feed  dealers 
in  our  town,  that  T  would  notify  the  secretary  of  the  New  York  Feed 
Dealers'  Association,  the  different  secretaries  of  the  smaller  organizations,  as 
well  as  Mr.  L.  L.  Brown,  secretary  of  the  American  Feed  Dealers'  Association. 
I  hereby  notify  you  in  regard  to  the  two  cars. 


824: 

Also  the  George  Q.  Moon  Company,  of  Binghanaton,  sold  to  the  New 
York  State  Women's  Relief  Corps  Home  here  a  part  of  a  car  of  feed  at  the 
same  price  that  they  are  asking  on  their  quotationss.  I  was  to-day  talking 
with  one  of  our  feed  dealers  who  buys  a  great  deal  from  Moon,  and  asked 
him  if  they  sent  him  the  commission,  and  he  said  that  it  was  the  first  that 
he  knew  about  the  feed  being  sold  direct. 

We  always  have  a  supply  of  the  Listman  goods  on  hand  but  have  cut 
out  their  flour,  middlings  and  bran. 

Very  truly  yours, 
JDR/N  J.  DEVEB  ROGERS  &  SON. 

The  Farmer's  Syndicate,  Incorporated,  of  Cortland,  applied  for 
membership,  but  their  check  was  returned  and  membership  refused 
because  they  sold  a  car  of  grain  for  $27.50  per  ton  to  the  farmers. 
The  following  letter  shows  the  source  of  their  information : 
E.  T.  &  J.  G.  WILCOX 

Dealers  in 

Flour,  Feed,  Grain  and  Farm  Produce 
Coal,  Shingles   and   Agricultural   Implements 

HABFOBD,  COBTLAND  COUNTY,  N.  Y.,  April  28,  1916. 
B.  C.  MYERS,  Harford  Mills,  N.  Y.: 

The  last  car  of  Dewey's  Dist.  grains  was  sold  out  of  car  for  $27.50  per  ton 
(bulk)  to  the  farmers,  as  you  will  find  that  this  price  is  about  cost  or  not 
over  50  cents  per  ton  profit.  The  car  number  was  P.  L.  Car  No.  531159.  This 
price  paid  was  given  me  from  a  farmer  who  they  tried  to  sell  to,  but  he  did 
not  take  any.  He  is  not  a  member  of  the  syndicate. 

Yours  respectfully, 

E.  T.  &  J.  G.  WILCOX. 


WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  April  8,  191C. 
CHAS.  L.  CABBIEB,  President,  Sherburne,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Mr.  Carrier. —  Enclose  some  correspondence  for  you  to  read  to-morrow. 

Now  this  syndicate  matter  is  a  pest.  If  they  are  going  to  sell  stuff  all 
over  in  everybody's  territory  and  certain  manufacturers  ship  to  these  points, 
they  are  very  materially  interfering  with  other  dealers'  business  who  are 
members  of  the  Association,  and  it  looks  very  much  to  me  as  if  Dewey  Bros, 
were  in  it. 

I  am  enclosing  the  Myers  letter  and  one  received  yesterday,  part  of  which 
I  'phoned  you  for  Bennett's  benefit. 

I  am  in  favor  of  returning  Mr.  Stoddard's  application;   what  do  you  say? 

Thomas  suggests  a  joint  meeting,  etc.,  but  that  is  out  of  the  question,  I 
think. 

What  do  you  think  of  Globe  Elevator's  reply'/1  The  letter  they  refer  to  was 
written  Hunt,  of  Oswego,  and  he  evidently  has  gulped  up  his  brains  to  them. 
I  enclose  copy  of  letter  written  Hunt  and  the  "trouble"  referred  to  meant 


825 

only  that  we  would  take  it  up  with  the  manufacturers  of  such  goods,  who 
might  toe  our  friends,  and  they  would  urge  the  Globe  they  did  not  wish  their 
goods  sold  direct  by  them.  This  man  Hunt  must  be  a  smart  one.  He  is  one 
of  Richards'  men  and  I  have  written  Richards  asking  what  kind  of  a  fellow 
he  can  be. 

Respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

The  above  letter  was  sufficient  to  justify  the  rejection  of  the  ap- 
plicant, as  is  shown  in  the  following  letter : 

Capitalized  $60,000. 

FARMERS'  SYNDICATE,  INC. 

Retail  Farm  Supplies  of  Every  Description 
41   Elm  Street 

CORTLAND,  N.  Y.,  April  19,  1916. 
Hon.  CHAS.  L.  CARRIER,  Sherburne,  N.  Y.: 

My  Dear  Carrier. —  I  am  in  receipt  of  a  letter  from  Mr.  H.  M.  King,  secre- 
tary of  the  New  York  State  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  in  which  he  has 
returned  the  application  of  the  Farmers'  Syndicate,  Inc.,  to  become  a  member 
of  the  Association.  I  can  say  that  we  did  not  expect  this  action,  after  the 
meeting  at  Binghamton  in  February  and  the  action  of  the  executive  com- 
mittee in  rejecting  this  application  is  certainly  a  great  injustice  to  our 
company.  1 1  4  i 

The  Farmers'  Syndicate,  Inc.,  is  a  corporation  duly  incorporated  under 
the  laws  of  this  State,  with  a  capital  stock  of  $60,000.00;  and  was  incorpor- 
ated for  the  purpose  of  doing  a  retail  business  in  grains,  feeds,  seeds  and  all 
kinds  of  agricultural  implements.  We  have  been  doing  business  since  the 
first  of  February  and  I  can  assure  you  that  we  have  had  a  very  nice  business 
and  everyone  is  being  treated  in  the  same  manner  as  to  price  or  otherwise. 
It  makes  no  difference  whether  a  person  has  stock  in  the  company  or  not, 
as  to  the  price  for  which  he  is  able  to  purchase,  and  our  business  is  made 
up  very  largely  among  farmers  and  others  who  own  no  stock  in  the  company 
whatever.  Our  business  is  purely  a  retail  business.  We  have  purchased 
a  plant  in  the  city  of  Cortland,  at  41  Elm  street,  paying  for  the  same 
$15,000.00,  and  our  business  is  all  done  from  that  place. 

I  cannot  understand  upon  what  evidence  your  committee  has  acted  in 
determining  that  we  are  not  purely  a  retail  dealer.  Surely,  it  must  have 
come  from  some  jealous  competitor  and  not  from  a  lack  of  business  principle. 
I  dare  say  that  our  profits  in  the  feed  that  we  are  retailing  are  as  much 
upon  every  ton  of  feed  sold  as  any  other  dealer  in  the  city  of  Cortland. 

Now  Mr.  Carrier,  I  should  like  to  meet  your  committee  or  yourself  per- 
sonally to  meet  any  complaint  or  objection  that  may  be  offered  against  this 
company.  I  certainly  can  convince  you  or  any  fair-minded  man  that  we  are 
entitled  under  your  constitution  and  by-laws  to  become  a  member  of  your 
Association  and  I  assume  that  it  would  not  undertake  to  do  any  regular 
dealer  the  injustice  of  not  admitting  it  to  membership. 


820 

This  same  matter  was  taken  up  fully  with  the  New  York  State  Implement 
Dealers'  Association,  through  Mr.  Grant  Wright,  of  the  "Eastern  Dealer," 
and  after  his  investigating  the  matter  thoroughly  he  has  accorded  us  a  hearty 
welcome  and  is  now  saying  some  good  things  for  us  along  the  implement 
line.  I  am  enclosing  you  a  copy  of  his  letter  to  us  on  March  17th,  showing 
fully  that  we  have  been  entirely  misrepresented  by  competitors.  I  have 
written  the  secretary,  Mr.  H.  M.  King,  a  similar  letter  and  hope  I  may 
hear  from  you  very  soon,  advising  me  as  to  what  course  I  should  pursue  to 
straighten  up  this  difficulty. 

Kindly  advise  me  fully  at  your  earliest  convenience. 

Yours  very  truly, 
GMS/P  G.  M.   STODDARD. 

WILLIAM  J.  CHANEY 

Dealer  in 

Flour,  Feed,  Grain,  Seeds, 
Farm  Implements 

CLINTON,  N.  Y.,  August  5,  1916. 
H.  M.  KING: 

Dear  Sir. —  I  received  your  letter  yesterday  in  regard  to  car  of  Red  Tag 
Bran  to  be  shipped  to  Francis  Jones.  I  remember  last  year  they  shipped  car 
in  here  the  samej  way  and  I  called  their  attention  to  it  and  told  them  I 
didn't  think  it  was  fair  to  ship  in  my  territory  without  consulting  me  first. 
They  certainly  played  fair  this  time  and  I  appreciate  it  very  much.  I  thank 
you. 

Yours  truly, 

WM.  J.  CHANEY, 
Per  C.  N.  C. 


JAMESTOWN,  N.  Y.,  August  1st,  1916. 
Mr.  LINCOLN  DAVIES,  Paris  Station,,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Have  your  postal  of  the  31st  to  book  and  ship  car  Red  Tag 
Bran  to  Francis  M.  Jones,  Clinton,  N.  Y.,  at  $25.25  and  make  draft  through 
the  Waterville  National  Bank  on  you. 

Mighty  glad  to  hear  from  you,  but  we  cannot  see  our  way  clear  to  accept 
any  business  on  Red  Tag  Bran  from  you  other  than  to  be  shipped  to  your 
place  of  business,  which  is  Paris  Station,  N.  Y. 

If  you  want  a  car  shipped  to  Paris  Station,  kindly  advise. 

Yours  very  truly, 

AMES-BURNS  Co. 


827 

(Copy) 

WATEBVILLH,  N.  Y.,  December  7,  1915. 
Mr.  CHAS.  CLOCK,  Trumanslurg,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  In  conversation  with  Mr.  J.  W.  West,  of  Chapin  &  Co.,  this 
morning,  I  have  learned  something  of  conditions  in  the  feed  trade  in  your 
locality  and  while  we  have  a  few  members  in  Tompkins  county  we  ought  to 
have  more,  so  that  in  taking  up  matters  of  direct  selling  affecting  you  dealers, 
we  can  present  to  those  manufacturers  and  jobbers  who  are  selling  direct 
through  various  agencies  in  the  section,  not  only  the  opposition  of  dealers 
as  a  whole,  but  a  large  representation  of  your  own  county. 

Mr.  West  tells  me  of  the  operations  of  this  man  Sternberg  and  I  under- 
stand he  buys  through  a  Cuba  concern  of  which  we  have  before  heard. 

We  are  gradually  getting  manufacturers  and  jobbers  lined  up  with  us 
and  you  would  be  surprised  to  know  what  actually  is  being  done.  What  we 
want  is  to  have  members  in  every  section  of  the  State  and  to  be  kept  posted 
on  every  case  of  direct  selling. 

In  this  way,  keeping  eternally  after  those  concerns  whose  goods  reach  the 
consumer  through  other  than  legitimate  channels,  we  will  eventually  show 
them  that  they  cannot  get  away  with  such  operations. 

Of  course,  it  is  impossible  to  go  into  detail  as  to  what  has  already  been 
accomplished  by  this  Association.  I  think  you  may  know  something  of  its 
activities.  I  could  give  you  many  concrete  cases  of  direct  selling  that  through 
taking  up  vigorously  with  the  shipper,  we  have  eliminated. 

If  you  would  attend  one  of  our  meetings  I  think  you  would  be  entirely 
satisfied  that  this  Association  is  a  good  thing  and  is  doing  some  good  work 
for  the  dealer. 

We  would  like  very  much  to  have  you  take  out  a  membership  in  the 
Association,  which  costs  but  $5.00  per  year,  and  am  sure  you  would  not 
regret  it.  At  any  rate,  wish  you  would  write  me  and  give  me  any  information 
that  would  be  of  value  to  the  Association,  for  we  are  endeavoring  to  help  the 
retail  dealer. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  March  13,  1916. 
SALES  DEPARTMENT,  QUAKER  OATS  Co.,  Chicago,  III.: 

Gentlemen. —  I  have  before  me  a  sheet  known  as  The  Tompkina  County 
Breeders'  Journal,  and  on  the  same  is  quoted,  direct  to  the  consumer,  grain, 
flour  and  feed  at  wholesale  by  a  farmer  at  Trumausburg,  N.  Y.,  by  the  name 
of  Steinberg.  He  advertises  a  list  of  feeds  both  in  mixed  and  straight  cars 
and  urges  the  farmers  to  co-operate  and  buy  their  grain,  flour  and  feed  at 
wholesale,  get  it  from  the  car  and  stop  paying  for  hauling  and  storage. 
His  prices  are  for  goods  at  any  station  within  20  miles  from  Ithaca  in 
20  ton  lots;  parts  of  carloads  reshipped  to  nearby  stations  at  one-half  cent 
per  cwt.  per  mile.  I  am  advised  that  he  gets  his  mixed  cars  of  Phelps  & 
Sibley,  Cuba,  N.  Y. 


825 

I  am  bringing  this  matter  to  your  attention  for  the  reason  that  he  is 
quoting  Schumacher  Stock  Feed  at  $29.40  in  mixed  cars  and  $28.65  in  straight 
cars  and  desire  to  know  if  you  approve  of  Phelps  &  Sibley  handling  your 
stuff  in  this  manner,  for  I  believe  there  are  a  great  many  dealers  affected  by 
these  quotations  who  are  also  handling  your  goods  and  this  proposition 
certainly  interferes  with  and  injures  the  business  of  those  dealers. 

Awaiting  your  reply,  I  beg  to  remain 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

(Copy) 

WATEBVILLE,  N.  Y.,  November  19,  1915. 
NOWAK  MILLING  CORPORATION,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.: 

Gentlemen. —  Replying  to  yours  of  the  1th  inst.,  which  has  received  the 
attention  of  our  executive  committee,  beg  to  say  we  thank  you  for  the 
expression  of  your  attitude  in  regard  to  sales  of  your  goods  to  other  than 
legitimate  retail  dealers. 

You  are  no  doubt  aware  that  dealers  everywhere  in  the  State  are  scrutiniz- 
ing shipments  more  closely  than  formerly  and  that  they  are  tracing  them 
back  to  the  source  from  which  they  come  (when  they  are  elivered  to  either 
farmers  direct,  or  what  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  granges  or  co-operative 
companies) 

We  suggest  that  those  mills  or  manufacturers  who  are  loyal  to  the  legiti- 
mate dealer,  can  use  their  influence  to  very  great  length  in  preventing  their 
jobbers  letting  their  goods  get  into  other  than  legitimate  channels. 

Many  jobbers  are  interested  in  the  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association  and 
we  know  those  quite  wel,  also  many  others  who  are  not  interested  by  member- 
ship, yet  who  are  as  loyal,  but  there  are  a  few  who  cannot  yet  resist  thje 
opportunity  of  selling  through  other  than  strictly  legitimate  channels. 

Believe  me,  the  manufacturer  and  jobber  ought  to  be  very  loyal  to  the 
retail  dealer,  for  if  these  direct-selling  agencies  had  their  way  they  would  cut 
out  the  jobbers,  as  well  as  the  retailers,  then  pool  their  orders  and  get  you 
manufacturers  to  bidding  for  the  business. 

Another  thing  —  your  reference  to  sometimes  selling  an  association  or 
farmer  in  turning  check  over  to  dealer  for  the  profit.  This,  of  course,  is  all 
right  when  the  dealer  requests  it,  but  it  is  a  poor  practice  anyway,  as  it 
cultivates  the  idea  of  direct  buying  and  the  moral  effect  on  the  dealer's  busi- 
ness it  bad. 

We  would  be  pleased  to  hear  from  you  further  in  regard  to  this  matter 
or  direct  selling. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 


829 

Albert  Nowak,  Maxwell  M.  Nowak, 

President.  General  Mgr. 

NOWAK  MILLING  CORPORATION 

Millers  Shippers 

Domino  Feeds 

BUFFALO,  N.  Y.,  November,  10,  1915 

THE  NEW  YORK  STATE  RETAIL  FEED  DEALERS  ASSOCIATION,  Waterville,  N.  Y.: 
Gentlemen. —  We  acknowledge   receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  4th,   advising 
that  your  Association  has  received  complaints  that  this  company  sells  direct 
to  the  consumer  and  over  the  heads  of  the  legitimate  dealers. 

In  our  remarks  to  our  numerous  feed  dealers  and  also  at  the  different 
feed  dealers'  conventions,  we  most  emphatically  stated  that  our  policy  was  at 
all  times  to  sell  to  the  legitimate  dealer.  We  have  turned  down  orders  time 
and  again  from  different  so-called  co-operative  companies  or  granges,  and  have 
lost  considerable  business  because  of  the  stand  we  have  taken.  Our  salesmen, 
who  have  also  been  with  us  for  years,  know  the  policy  of  this  house,  and 
they  have  also  been  approached  very  often,  but  have  always  declined  the 
business. 

There  have  been  cases  where  it  was  possible  to  take  an  order  from  a  local 
association  or  farmer  that  was  turned  over  to  the  dealer.  In  cases  of  this 
kind,  we  invoiced  and  drew  draft  on  the  farmer  and  sent  the  dealer  a  check 
for  his  profit.  We  have  done  this  purely  upon  instructions  from  the  dealer 
and  with  his  full  permission.  We  have,  on  several  occasions  in  the  past,  sold 
mixed  cars  of  our  feed  to  jobbers  and  vouch  for  the  ultimate  destination 
of  these  cars.  However,  because  of  the  mere  fact  that  the  jobbers  are  inter- 
ested in  the  Retail  Feed  Dealers'  Association  and  its  policy,  there  is  no 
question  in  our  minds  but  that  the  feed  went  to  the  dealer  and  not  to  the 
consumer. 

We  certainly  feel  bad  to  have  pointed  out  to  us  a  miscarriage  of  our 
policy,  and  if  such  is  true,  we  certainly  would  be  very  glad  to  cut  out  any 
broker  who  would  take  the  liberty  of  working  against  the  policy  of  this 
house. 

Your  letter  is  a  very  fair  one  and  we  certainly  are  very  glad  to  present 
to  you  our  stand  in  this  much  discussed  matter. 
Wishing  your  Association  success,  we  are 

Yours  very  truly, 

NOWAK   MILLING    CORP., 
MMN.F  Per  M.  M.  NOWAK,  Vice.-Pres. 


830 

THE  NEW  YORK  STATE  RETAIL  FEED  DEALERS'  ASSOCIATION 

OFFICERS 

President,   CHARLES  L.  CARRIER,  Sherburne,  N.  Y. 
Vice-President,  W.   C.   RICHARDS,  Parish,  N.   Y. 
Secretary,  H.  M.  KING,  Waterville,  N.  Y. 
Treasurer,  M.  J.  MTTDGE,  Afton,  N.  Y. 
Additional    Member    of    Ex.    Com.,    F.    C.    JONES, 
Bullville,  N.  Y. 

Associate  Member   American   Feed 
Manufacturers'  Association. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  January  14,  1916. 

CHAS.  L.  CARRIER,  President,  Sherlurne,  AT.  I7.: 

Dear  Mr.  Carrier. —  Your  favor  of  the  13th  at  hand.  Glad  you  had  such 
a  pleasant  trip  to  Oswego  and  am  sure  they  enjoyed  having  you  with  them. 
You  did  not  state  whether  Mr.  Richards  was  present  or  not,  but  judge  that 
you  would  have  mentioned  it  if  he  had  been. 

In  regard  to  the  printed  matter  and  cuts,  I  have  no  suitable  photo  at  the 
present  time  to  have  a  cut  made  from,  but  I  wrote  Mr.  Anderson  of  Mil- 
waukee that  I  would  have  a  real  nice  one  taken  shortly  so  that  he  could 
have  it  if  he  desired  and  possibly  I  may  tend  to  the  matter  to-morrow  and 
will  get  it  out  in  time,  if  possible,  for  use  in  the  printed  matter  which  we 
are  now  preparing. 

I  received  a  letter  from  Jones  this  morning  and  will  enclose  the  same  for 
your  attention  and  comment.  His  idea  about  the  conference  with  the  jobbers 
is  somewhat  different  than  I  understood  at  first;  however,  you  can  say 
whatever  you  think  about  it. 

I  am  enclosing  copy  of  letter  I  am  writing  the  Bartlett  Company  to-day. 
Do  not  know  as  I  stated  they  shipped  a  car  of  distillers'  grains  in  here. 

As  soon  as  they  get  a  proof  of  the  printed  matter  off,  wish  you  would  send 
it  up  so  I  can  look  it  over. 

Don't  think  of  anything  further  to-day. 

Very  respectfully, 

(Signed)     H.  M.  KING, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

WATERVILLE,  N.  Y.,  January  14,  191C. 
J.  E.  BARTLETT  Co.,  Jackson,  Mich.  : 

Gentlemen. —  There  has  been  unloaded  at  this  station  car  No.  62754  C.  M.  & 
St.  Paul,  containing  distillers'  grains  from  you  shipped  to  the  Farmers' 
Co-operative  Company,  which  is  a  direct  buying  concern,  unloading  from 
ear  to  farmers,  to  the  injury  of  the  local  dealer. 

Inasmuch  as  the  writer  is  a  regular  legitimate  dealer  here,  maintaining 
an  establishment,  employing  men  with  families,  paying  large  taxes  and  hon- 
eatly  endeavoring  to  make  a  living  for  himself  and  family.  I  take  the  liberty 
of  writing  you  with  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  if  you  appreciated  the  status 
of  thia  body  of  consumers,  nothing  more  or  less,  clubbed  together  to  take 
advantage  of  the  dealer  who  has  always  extended  courtesies  to  them  and 


831 

whom,  according  to  the  common  ethics  of  business,  it  must  be  admitted  is 
entitled  to  the  patronage  of  his  community. 

I  need  not  say  that  your  action  in  shipping  this  car  here  to  a  body  of  con- 
sumers is  in  direct  antagonism  to  me  as  a  dealer  and  is  hardly  in  line  witii 
statements  made  in  former  correspondence  with  me  as  secretary  of  the  New 
York  State  lletail  Feed  Dealers'  Association  as  to  your  policy  towards  direct 
Felling  and,  therefore,  I  am  inclined  at  the  present  moment  to  believe  that  in 
making  the  sale  and  shipment  of  this  car  here  you  were  not  really  aware  of  its 
manner  of  disposal  nor  the  purpose  of  those  purchasing  it,  which  I  assure 
you  is  none  other  than  to  side-step  or  put  one  over  on  the  dealer  and  is  pre- 
cisely in  line  with  the  spirit  which  prompts  certain  individuals  to  deal  with 
mail  order  houses  whom  you  well  know  are  not  contributors  to  the  upkeep  or 
general  welfare  of  any  community,  either  from  a  social  or  financial  stand- 
point. 

The  organization,  if  it  may  be  called  such,  to  whom  you  have  sold  this  car 
is  not  a  popular  one  and  I  can  assure  you  does  not  have  the  sympathy  of  the 
majority  of  people,  either  farmers  or  business  interests.  It  is  composed  of 
a  few  disgruntled  ones,  such  as  you  find  everywhere,  and  who  either  want 
something  for  nothing,  or  else  are  so  selfish  that  they  do  not  wish  to  see  any- 
one else  make  any  progress  and  who  would  turn  you  down  as  quickly  as  us 
if  someone  came  along  and  offered  them  any  old  thing  at  a  little  under  your 
price. 

The  whole  thing  is  begotten  of  a  spirit  pregnant  with  hostility  to,  rather 
than  encouragement  of  community  interest,  and  has  not  only  affected  the  feed 
dealer,  but  has  extended  its  baneful  influence  to  every  other  class  of  business 
in  our  midst  or  in  any  other  town  where  such  propositions  are  being  imposed. 

The  State  Association  of  Retail  Feed  Dealers  is  not  altogether  altruistic 
in  that  it  is  looking  after  its  own  interests  altogether.  We  are  working  in  a 
co-operative  spirit  both  with  the  manufacturer  and  consumer  and  as  respects 
the  latter,  we  propose  to  see  that  all  goods  are  sold  strictly  in  compliance 
with  State  and  Federal  Laws  insofar  as  we  are  able  to  do  so,  and  in  thia 
connection  the  writer  has  had  called  to  his  attention  the  fact  that  the  car 
of  distillers'  grains  shipped  here  by  your  firm  were  in  sacks  and  that  there 
were  no  marks  on  the  sacks  nor  tags  applied  indicating  or  specifying  the 
quality  or  brand  of  goods,  analysis  and  weight,  and  while  the  writer  saw  a 
number  of  these  sacks  on  farmer's  sleighs,  also  in  the  car,  which  would  bear 
out  the  intimation,  I  do  not  wish  to  even  suggest  the  thought  of  complaint, 
but  simply  desire  to  impress  upon  you  that  we  are  not  a  one-sided  organiza- 
tion by  any  means.  We  believe  in  living  and  let  live  and  we  also  believe  that 
there  is  business  enough  for  all,  but  that  it  should  be  conducted  along  proper 
channels  and  that  is  through  the  legitimate  dealer. 

No  manufacturer  or  jobber  can  reasonably  expect  to  sell  every  dealer  and 
the  idea  that  a  dealer  can  be  forced  to  handle  any  feed  is  absurd  because  that 
principle  can  be  worked  to  the  disadvantage  of  those  who  attempt  to  carry 
it  out  in  that  you  for  instance  might  have  a  dealer  customer,  who  like  many 
others,  is  giving  you  a  large  share  of  his  business,  when  along  comes  another 
manufacturer  or  jobber  who  might  insist  that  your  customer  must  handle 
some  of  his  goods  which  are  similar  and  represented  equally  as  good  and 
possibly  so,  with  the  threat  that  if  he  does  not  he  will  go  out  and  sell  direct. 
Now  in  such  an  event  where  do  you  get  off? 


832 


I  simply  inentiou  the  above  as  ail  illustration.  We  sell  our  feeds  on  a 
quality  basis;  have  facilities  for  State  and  private  laboratory  test  and  we 
will  place  our  goods  side  of  anything  offered  on  the  market  and  as  low,  if  not 
a  little  lower,  for  we  sell  for  cash. 

I  shall  be  very  glad  to  receive  the  favor  of  a  reply. 

Yours  respectfully, 
HMK/D  Secretary. 

The  foregoing  exhibits  taken  at  random  from  the  testimony  are 
but  an  insignificant  part  and  do  not  disclose  one  one-hundredth  of 
the  ill  practices  and  vicious  attitude  of  this  Association. 


SHORTAGES  IN  ELEVATOR  WEIGHTS 

A  large  proportion  of  the  grain  used  in  the  State  of  New  York 
is  carried  by  lake  boats  from  western  ports  and  unloaded  in  eleva- 
tors at  the  city  of  Buffalo.  Usually,  the  companies  operating  the 
elevators  have  no  interest  or  ownership  in  the  grain,  but  merely 
perform  the  function  of  storing  it  at  stated  rates  for  the  grain 
merchants.  The  grain  merchant  buying  his  grain  throughout  the 
Central  Western  States  secures  shipment  on  lake  boats  to  the 
Buffalo  elevator  which  unloads  the  grain  from  the  boats  and  stores 
it  until  ordered  by  the  owner  to  be  delivered  to  customers  through- 
out this  or  other  states.  Thus  the  grain  that  is  received  by  boat 
is  usually  shipped  out  in  carload  lots  to  customers.  These  large 
grain  elevators  are  equipped  with  weighing  apparatus  designed 
to  weigh  an  entire  carload  of  corn,  oats  or  wheat  at  one  draft. 
Manufacturers  of  flour  throughout  the  State  buy  large  parts  of 
their  supplies  of  wheat  through  these  elevators.  Manufacturers, 
merchants  and  stockmen  ofttimes  buy  carloads  of  corn  or  oats. 

From  the  evidence  presented  to  this  Committee,  it  may  be  said 
that  there  is  a  more  or  less  'Systematic  under-weighing  of  the  car- 
load at  the  elevator.  As  a  result  of  this  under-weighing,  the  buyer 
from  the  grain  merchant  receives  from  one  hundred  to  one  thou- 
sand pounds  of  grain  less  than  the  carload  weight  calls  for.  As 
to  this  systematic  under-weighing,  the  buyer  of  the  ordinary  car- 
load has  little  remedy.  The  grain  merchant  who  sold  the  grain, 
when  confronted  by  the  claim  for  shortage,  falls  back  upon  the 
certified  elevator  weight  as  proof  that  the  full  shipment  was  made. 


833 

£o  far  as  the  evidence  before  the  Committee  shows,  the  grain 
merchant  is  not  himself  at  fault.  He  does  not  profit  by  the  short- 
age. The  only  party  who  profits  is  the  elevator  operator  or  com- 
pany. That  certain  of  the  grain  elevators  in  Buffalo  have  made 
these  shortages  a  source  of  substantial  profit  is  plainly  shown  by 
the  evidence.  As  has  been  suggested,  due  to  the  present  lack  of 
food  traffic  supervision  by  the  State,  the  consumer  or  manufacturer 
who  buys  this  grain  is  practically  without  a  remedy.  In  a  great 
majority  of  cases  the  feed  dealer  or  stock  raiser  is  without  adequate 
facilities  to  accurately  weigh  the  car  of  oats  or  corn  purchased  by 
him  and  ascertain  whether  or  not  it  is  one  hundred  or  perhaps 
twelve  hundred  pounds  under  weight.  He  receives  a  full  carload, 
pays  for  a  full  carload,  and  probably  in  the  great  majority  of  cases 
is  unable  to  determine  without  going  to  considerable  expense  how 
much,  if  any,  shortage  exists.  Even  the  manufacturer  is  unable, 
without  considerable  expense,  to  check  up  each  carload  as  to 
weight.  He  should  be  able  to  rely  upon  the  honesty  and  fail- 
dealing  of  the  elevator  man  handling  grain  of  which  he  does  not 
own  a  single  kernel,  to  give  him  full  weight,  but  the  evidence  es- 
tablishes that  there  is  no  safety  for  him  in  such  reliance.  Even  if 
he  discovers  the  shortage,  he  cannot  afford  in  the  great  majority 
of  cases,  to  go  into  court  of  law  to  establish  his  claim  for  a  shortage 
of  from  ten  to  fifty  bushels  in  the  carload,  as  the  attendant  legal 
expenses  in  litigating  with  an  elevator  company  or  a  grain  merch- 
ant one  or  two  hundred  miles  distant  would  amount  to  more  than 
the  shortage  involved.  The  Committee  gives  some  of  the  evi- 
dence taken  on  this  point  for  the  consideration  of  the  Legislature. 

ARTHUR  A.  COWKES,  called  as  a  witness  and  sworn,  testified : 
"  I  live  at  85  Burr  street,  Rochester,  and  am  the  vice-president 
and  secretary  of  the  Mystic  Milling  and  Feed  Company.  We  grind 
feed  and  ship  mixed  cars  to  dealers  through  the  East.  Our  trade 
in  this  State  is  between  Rochester  and  ITtica.  We  endeavor  to  do 
business  with  whoever  wants  to  buy  in  wholesale  lots  and  have 
shipped  to  granges  and  others.  Our  business  is  mostly  corn  and 
oats ;  we  make  the  Mystic  Brand  of  stock  feed  for  horses,  cattle  and 
swine.  It  is  made  out  of  hominy,  corn  meal  and  middlings,  ground 
oats  and  barley,  oat  hull  and  middlings,  ground  oat  hulls.  There 
27 


834 

is  about  five  per  cent,  of  oat  hulls  and  oat  middlings.  The  other 
feeds  are. compound  straight  feeds.  Anybody  that  has  the  price 
can  buy  our  grain.  If  all  business  was  transacted  according  to 
the  program  of  the  !New  York  State  Feed  Dealers'  Association,  we 
would  have  a  universal  boycott  going  on  somewhere  all  the  time. 
I  see  no  reason  why  dealers  in  Niagara  county  should  blacklist  our 
company  and  refuse  to  handle  our  product  because  we  had  sold  a 
carload  of  feed  to  a  dairyman  or  a  grange  in  Oneida  county.  There 
is  no  just  moral  reason. 

Elevator  Short  Weights 

"  Our  cars  are  running  in  short  weights  from  Buffalo  elevator 
companies  more  especially.  We  called  in  the  Department  of 
Weights  and  Measures  on  two  occasions,  once  in  June,  1915,  and 
once  in  December.  They  tested  our  scales  thoroughly,  found  it 
accurate,  and  while  they  were  watching  our  unloading  here  the  De- 
partment had  inspectors  in  Buffalo  at  the  different  elevators. 
While  these  inspections  were  going  on  our  shortages  stopped. 

"Shortly  after  the  inspection  was  over,  our  shortages  commenced 
to  creep  in  again.  These  shortages  would  average  from  one  to  two 
and  one-half  per  cent.  We  had  one  car  of  wheat  that  was  three  per 
cent  short.  The  car  of  wheat  should  have  contained  60,000  pounds 
and  we  were  something  like  800  pounds  short  on  that  one  car.  It 
was  billed  to  us  at  60,000  pounds.  That  made  nearly  thirty 
bushels.  We  were  just  three  per  cent,  on  that  particular  car,  or 
thirty  bushels.  The  car  should  have  contained  1,000  bushels; 
it  really  contained  970  bushels. 

"  Then  we  were  running  consistently  short  on  oats  and  corn  from 
one  to  two  per  cent.  I  happened  to  see  one  of  the  letters  of  one 
elevator  company  during  the  correspondence  with  the  State  Depart- 
ment and  in  that  letter  this  elevator  company  claimed  they  were 
entitled  to  a  shortage  of  one  per  cent, 

I  maintained  if  they  were  entitled  to  one  per  cent.,  they  might 
as  well  make  it  worth  while  and  steal  ten  per  cent.  I  was  instru- 
mental in  introducing  a  bill  in  the  Legislature  last  winter  provid- 
ing for  the  public  weighing  of  grain  in  terminal  elevators  under 
the  supervision  of  the  Superintendent  of  Weights  and  Measures. 
That  was  opposed  by  the  Corn  Exchange  of  Buffalo  and  we  did  not 


get  it  through.  Since  that  fight  last  winter,  the  shortages  of  our 
particular  company  have  stopped.  We  believe  they  have  us  spotted 
as  kickers  and  therefore  we  get  our  full  weights.  In  a  year  and  a 
half  our  shrinkages  amounted  in  dollars  and  cents  to  over  $1,800. 
This  money  was  taken  out  of  our  company  by  short  weights  at  the 
Buffalo  elevators. 

'  These  shortages  do  not  apply  to  those  caused  by  leaky  cars. 
Where  we  find  a  car  leaking,  we  call  in  the  railroad  men  and  have 
them  certify  it  was  leaking  and  then  if  a  shortage  occurs  we  make 
claims  against  the  railroad;  but  these  shortages  were  all  on  cars 
in  perfect  condition.  We  couldn't  make  any  claim. 

"There  is  no  substantial  or  necessary  loss  in  the  shipment  by  rail 
of  these  iiTains  in  perfect  cars.  We  get  grain  from  as  far  west  as 
Penria  and  even  from  Sioux  City,  Iowa,  with  no  shortages.  The 
elevator  companies  do  not  attempt  any  explanation  unless  it  is  the 
one  that  they  are  entitled  to  one  per  cent,  shortage.  They  stood  on 
their  divinity  and  said  the  grain  was  there  when  it  was  loaded. 
They  claimed  they  were  entitled  to  a  variation  of  one  per  cent,  for 
variation  in  scales,  but  we  claimed  that  in  that  case  the  variation 
would  not  always  go  one  way.  If  this  was  a  legitimate  variation, 
sometimes  we  would  get  a  car  over  weight.  If  a  man  buys  a  bushel 
of  "-rain  or  a  thousand  bushels  of  grain,  he  is  entitled  to  it.  He  has 
paid  for  it. 

}\'i'i(/hiny  llciliods 

"  These  carload  lots  are  weighed  in  hopper  scales  in  the  top  of 
the  terminal  elevators  and  then  it  is  put  into  a  chute  and  dropped 
into  the  cars  from  the  hopper  scale  in  the  top  of  the  elevator. 

"  The  cnrs  arc  first  coopered.  Then  they  put  the  grain  doors  in 
and  stop  all  leaks  in  the  car  and  shoot  the  grain  into  the  car  from 
the  top  of  the  elevator.  The  grain  goes  into  the  hopper  scales  from 
another  chute  elevated  up  into  the  hopper,  shut  off,  weighed  and 
dumped,  one  weighing:  for  a  whole  carload. 

"  The  Sealer  of  Weights  and  Measures  is  supposed  to  test  these 
smiles  two  or  three  times  a  year. 

"  The  simplest  way  to  check  these  weights  is  to  make  a  public 
matter  of  it,  the  same  as  they  have  done  in  Illinois  and  Minnesota. 
X  early  all  of  the  gr  a  in-growing  states  have  both  the  weights  and 
under  the  supervision  of  the  State.  It  amounts  simply  to  a 


836 

practice  of  shipping  short  weight  quantity  in  bulk  and  billing  it  aa 
the  full  quantity. 

''  We  had  some  shipments  true  to  weight.  Some  elevators  were 
very  careful  to  give  full  weight.  We  could  say  we  could  discrimin- 
ate against  certain  elevators  and  now  we  try  to  m'ake  inquiries 
what  elevator  it  is  coming  from  before  we  buy  it.  We  always  get 
the  short  weight  in  certain  elevators.  Four  of  them  are  controlled 
by  a  man  named  Pierce;  one,  Evans;  another  one,  Wheeler,  and 
another  one,  the  Monarch.  Those  are  the  three  we  get  the  worst 
shortages  from. 

"  I  understand  the  scales  in  those  elevators  have  been  found  to 
be  correct  by  the  Department  of  Weights  and  Measures.  We  got 
those  shortages  all  along  last  winter.  We  have  the  shipping  bills 
for  these  cars  and  will  be  glad  to  turn  over  the  check  weights  and 
bills  to  the  Committee  with  the  car  numbers  and  dates. 

"  Our  company  has  nothing  to  complain  of  now  since  we  caused 
that  bill  to  be  introduced,  but  as  a  result  of  this  practice,  whenever 
we  could,  we  discriminated  against  Buffalo  and  bought  direct  from 
the  West  where  we  get  public  weight  certificates.  In  the  State  of 
Illinois  we  never  have  any  shortages. 

"  I  was  told,  when  a  bill  was  introduced,  that  the  State  could  not 
afford  to  spend  any  money.  We  got  that  bill  out  of  the  Senate,  but 
it  died  in  the  Assembly. 

Consumer  Bears  the  Burden 

"  If  there  is-  a  uniform  practice  of  short-weighing  and  the  re- 
ceiver of  that  grain  becomes  acquainted  with  it,  he  simply  add« 
that  percentage  onto  his  cost  and  the  consumer  has  to  bear  it.  If 
the  dealer  is  short  on  the  bulk  car  he  cannot  make  short  weight 
bags,  but  has  to  make  full  weight  bags  and  simply  adds  the  shortage 
on  the  price.'7 

BBOFIT     FBOM.    SHORT     WEIGHTS     IN     ELEVATOR     COMPANY'S 

ACCOUNTS 

After  receiving  testimony  of  the  foregoing  nature,  the  Commit 
tee  undertook  to  ascertain  whether  such  shortages  resulted  from  the 
operations  of  the  Buffalo  elevators  and  what  the  result  of  sucli 
shortages  were  to  the  elevator  companies.  For  that  purpose,  the 


837 

books  of  account  of  certain  elevator  companies  and  accompanying 
testimony  from  the  elevator  managers  was  sought. 

WILLIAM  B.  GREGORY,  called  before  the  Committee  and' 
sworn,  testified: 

"  I  live  at  19  Crescent  avenue  in  Buffalo;  am  manager  of  the 
Dakota  Elevator.  It  is  a  corporation  owned  by  Buffalo  capitalists. 
John  II.  Brinkman  is  acting  secretary ;  Edward  Michael  is  presi- 
dent. The  business  of  this  corporation  is  lifting  and  storing  and 
shipping  grain.  We  only  store  other  people's  grain.  We  own 
none  of  it  and  we  sell  no  grain  on  our  own  account.  We  lift  th<* 
grain  from  the  lake  boats  that  come  to  Buffalo  and  store  it  for 
various  peoples'  accounts  whom  it  may  concern,  then  we  ship  it  out 
on  their  directions.  Shipping  directions  are  given  to  the  man  thai; 
has  charge  of  shipments.  The  owner  draws  an  order  on  the  eleva- 
tor for  the  shipment  of  a  specific  lot  of  grain.  The  identity  of  all 
grain  is  preserved.  It  goes  down  in  different  holds  of  the  boat. 
The  elevators  at  this  port  do  not  simply  take  the  grain  and  return  it 
in  kind ;  not  the  lake  grain  elevators.  Each  man  who  puts  in  grain 
into  our  elevators  gets  back  his  specific  grain.  We  have  a  great 
many  separate  storage  bins.  The  identity  has  to  be  preserved. 

"  A  standard  carload  of  wheat  is  1,000  bushel,  weighing  60,000 
pounds.  The  cars  are  set  into  the  elevator  and  we  load  the  grain 
as  the  cars  are  received.  The  car  goes  directly  under  the  elevator 
chute  and  the  grain  runs  from  the  scales  into  the  car.  Our  scales 
weighs  250  bushels  at  a  draft.  It  is  filled,  weighed  and  dropped 
into  the  car.  If  a  man  had  50,000  bushel  stored  in  our  elevator1 
and  50  carloads  were  shipped  out,  that  would  dean  it  all  out." 

Mr.  Ward. — Here  is  a  witness  that  ordered  5,000  bushel  loaded 
at  your  elevator  and  his  first  car  was  580  pounds  less  than  1,000 
bushel;  the  second  car  was  720  pounds  less  than  a  thousand 
bushels ;  the  third  car  was  840  pounds  less  than  1,000  bushel ;  the 
fourth  car  was  360  pounds  less  than  a  thousand  bushel;  the  fifth 
car  was  680  pounds  less  than  1,000  bushel,  on  weighing.  That  is, 
it  was  short  $97  worth  of  grain. 

Mr.  Gregory. —  Well,  that  could  be  occasioned  from  the  fact  in 
the  difference  in  the  scales.  Maybe  his  scales  are  not  quite  correct 
as  they  might  have  been;  maybe  his  scales  weigh  in  smaller  capa- 


838 

city  than  the  scales  which  weigh  the  grain  out.     I  know  nothing 
ahout  that. 

There  is  always  supposed  to  be  a  representative  of  the  railroads 
that  load  the  grain.  The  stuff  is  weighed  out  under  the  directions 
of  the  Corn  Exchange  under  the  Weighmaster's  department  of  the 
Corn  Exchange  of  Buffalo.  A  lot  of  the  stuff  is  weighed  out  by 
the  supervising  agent  of  the  different  railroads.  We  have  received 
complaints  of  shortages  probably  two  or  three  times  a  year.  We 
investigate  and  find  out  about  it.  Find  out  if  the  stuff  was  loaded 
on  the  orders  called  for;  if  we  find  that  the  orders  were  loaded  all 
right,  we  simply  say  so. 

Mr.  Ward. —  Isn't  there  any  trade  custom  of  allowing  shortage 
on  a  thousand  bushel,  say  one  per  cent.  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — I  could  not  tell  you  that,  sir.  I  am  not  in  the 
grain  trade  and  don't  know  anything  about  it.  If  shortages  did 
exist,  we  would  have  a  surplus.  You  may  have  a  few  bushels  there 
and  those  few  bushels  we  dispose  of  certainly. 

Mr.  Ward.— How  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Well,  you  wouldn't  give  it  away ;  you  would  have 
to  dispose  of  it  through  some  broker  or  somebody  in  the  grain  busi- 
ness ;  you  wouldn't  sell  it  yourself ;  wouldn't  be  in  a  position  to  sell 
it.  It  would  take  a  long  time  to  accumulate  a  carload.  I  don't 
know  just  exactly  how  it  would  go  into  the  books  of  the  company 
when  sold.  It  wrould  have  to  be  credited  somewhere.  It  isn't  any 
perquisite  of  the  weighmaster  or  the  managers. 

No  Shortages  Allowed  in  Weighing  In. 

If  a  bill  of  lading  calls  for  50,000  bushels  of  grain  and  the 
steamboat  comes  to  the  elevator  and  in  taking  the  grain  out  of  the 
boat  you  only  find,  we  will  say,  49,000  bushel,  that  is  arranged  and 
straightened  out  and  handled  by  the  vessel  agent  and  a  concern 
called  the  Lake  Grain  Clearance  Association  here  in  Buffalo.  We 
can  only  give  a  receipt  for  exactly  what  we  take  out  of  the  boat 
and  that  is  all  the  shipper  gets  credit  for. 

Mr.  Ward. — But  after  you  have  shipped  out  John  Smith's 
50,000  bushel,  if  you  have  got  100  bushels  over  that  is  sold  by 
the  elevator  company  ? 


839 

Mr.  Gregory. — Well,  it  is,  and  it  isn't.  Now,  you  asked  me  the 
question,  when  I  first  sat  down  here,  if  we  ever  sold  any  grain. 
When  you  asked  that  question,  I  figured  in  my  own  mind  that  you 
intended  I  should  say  I  was  in  the  grain  business  in  selling  grains. 
Now,  I  am  not  in  the  grain  business  and  we  would  certainly  neces- 
sarily have  to  sell  this  grain  if  we  had  any  over-run. 

Mr.  Ward. — Why  not  credit  it  to  John  Smith  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Well,  it  would  be  pretty  hard  to  tell  exactly  who 
owned  the  grain,  so  many  people  participate  in  it ;  you  could  not 
tell  where  it  belonged. 

Mr.  Ward. — Each  storage  is  in  bulk  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Yes,  sir;  it  is. 

Mr.  Ward. — Each  lot  is  kept  distinct? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Yes,  sir;  it  is.  There  would  be  no  trouble  in 
knowing  that  the  surplus  belonged  to  a  certain  consignment,  but 
these  consignments  change  hands  twenty-five  times.  The  original 
storer  might  not  have  any  equity  in  it  at  all.  You  could  credit  it 
to  the  man  who  turned  in  the  receipt,  but  it  would  be  an  endless 
chain  of  business;  you  would  never  get  through  with  your  busi- 
ness. 

Mr.  Ward. —  It  is  easier  to  sell  it  then,  and  credit  it  to  the  ele- 
vator's account  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — It  has  been,  as  I  have  understood  it,  that  the 
stuff  that  accumulates  that  way  is  the  property  of  the  elevator,  but 
I  want  you  to  distinctly  understand  that  I  did  not  understand  the 
question  you  put  to  me  in  the  first  place,  because  the  grain  is  sold ; 
theref ore,  going  back  to  my  statement  we  have  sold  grain ;  we  have 
sold  it  to  different  people.  A  shortage  of  TOO  pounds  of  oats  on  a 
car  would  be  twenty-two  bushel;  1,200  pounds  of  wheat  would  be 
car  would  be  twenty-two  bushel.  1,200  pounds  of  wheat  would  be 
twenty  bushel.  I  have  never  investigated  the  average  shortages. 
There  is  no  weig-hmaster  of  the  port  of  Buffalo  nowr.  The  Lake 
Grain  Clearance  Association  only  attends  to  shortages  in  the  grain 
when  it  is  delivered  to  the  elevator,  when  it  is  weighed  in. 

Mr.  Ward. — Say  a  miller  in  Binghamton  gets  the  car  and  pays 
the  draft,  takes  the  bill  of  lading  and  gets  delivery,  he  has  paid  for 


840 

the  carload  of  grain;  lie  finds  that  he  is  twenty  bushel  short  of 
weight  at  $1  a  bushel,  $20 ;  and  he  sends  a  statement  to  your  ele- 
vator company  that  you  owe  him  $20  for  twenty  bushels  of  wheat, 
and  you  do  find  the  twenty  bushels  in  your  bin  there,  there  would 
not  be  much  trouble  or  bookkeeping  about  remitting  him  that  $20 
when  you  found  the  excess  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — He  would  not  send  a  statement  to  us  for  it  for  ho 
hasn't  done  any  business  with  the  elevator;  he  has  done  business 
with  the  man  who  put  the  grain  in  the  elevator. 

Mr.  Ward. — We  have  got  a  statement  here  of  the  Mystic  Milling 
and  Feeding  Company  that  they  furnished  the  Dakota  Elevator 
showing  an  indebtedness  in  this  way  of  $113.63  for  these  shortages 
and  claim  they  forwarded  it  to  your  people,  but  could  not  get  at- 
tention. 

Mr.  Gregory. —  Well,  we  may  have  done  that,  but  I  say  the  cus- 
tomary way  to  do  would  be  to  send  it  to  the  man  he  bought  the 
grain  from. 

Mr.  Ward. — Well,  but  that  man  has  gotten  his  money  and  the 
miller  has  gotten  his  grain,  except  the  shortage  and  the  account  is 
closed  and  the  grain  merchant  refers  him  to  the  railroad  company 
or  elevator  man,  does  he  not  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Well,  he  could  do  that ;  he  could  refer  him  to  the 
railroad  agent.  We  have  not  necessarily  got  their  shortages  here. 
There  are  a  great  many  shortages  that  are  occasioned  from  the  fact 
of  the  condition  of  the  railroad  car.  Of  course,  it  is  not  all  that 
way.  Fair  dealing  might  require  that  this  man  gets  credit  on  the 
elevator  books  for  the  amount  of  his  shortage  if  it  was  actually 
found  that  we  had  it  in  our  elevator.  But  if  we  allowed  his  claim, 
all  of  these  people  would  have  shortages  when  they  didn't  have 
them  and  the  elevator  company  wouldn't  have  a  dollar  left.  You 
know  an  elevator  scale  is  a  pretty  big  thing  when  you  commence 
to  weigh  fifteen  or  thirty  bushels  at  a  time. 

The  Buffalo  Scale  Company  looks  after  the  scales  and  there  are 
other  scale  people  here.  I  cannot  recall  whether  they  are  the  ones 
that  look  after  our  scales  this  spring ;  the  scales  are  tested  three  or 
four  times  a  year.  Weather  conditions  and  being  located  on  the 
water  where  there  is  dampness,  all  these  things  have  a  tendency  to 


841 

in  like  the  scales  go  one  or  the  other.  We  weigh  it  in  one  or  two 
weights,  but  the  man  down  in  the  country  weighs  it  into  a  wagon 
and  the  stuff  blows  away.  We  have  got  some  books  that  show  our 
sales  of  grain  for  1915  and  1916.  I  have  charge  of  making  those 
sales.  I  sold  the  last  lot  here  to  Mr.  Engle  in  the  Ellicott  Square 
Building.  ITe  is  a  grain  merchant. 

Mr.  Ward.— What  did  you  sell  him  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — I  couldn't  tell  you  that,  sir. 

Mr.  Ward. — Well,  what  was  it,  corn  or  wheat  ? 

llr.  Gregory. — I  think  wheat. 

Mr.  Ward. — How  many  bushels,  approximately? 

Mr.  Gregory. — I  could  not  answer  that. 

Mr.  Ward. — A  carload. 

Mr.  Gregory. — Yes,  more  than  a  carload. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  would  be  a  thousand  bushels. 

Mr.  Gregory. — Probably  two  or  three  thousand  bushels.  I  think 
that  sale  was  made  sometime  this  spring.  I  have  not  sold  any  since. 
I  cannot  tell  when  I  made  a  sale  before  that.  That  transaction  of 
this  wheat  entered  on  our  books  and  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  went 
to  our  company. 

Air.  Ward. — You  must  have  something  in  your  bins  now. 

Mr.  Gregory. — We  have  got  quite  a  lot  in  our  bins  at  the  pres- 
ent time.  We  can  get  at  it  when  we  clean  up  the  elevator,  when  we 
iM't  through  with  the  current  receipts,  along  about  the  1st  of  April. 
We  never  clean  up  the  elevator;  it  has  a  capacity  of  a  million 
bushels,  and  there  is  always  at  least  two  hundred  and  fifty  thou- 
sand bushels  of  grain. 

Mr.  Ward. — We  wonder,  how  did  you  find  out  you  could  afford 
to. spare  anyone  two  or  three  thousand  bushels  of  wheat  last  spring? 

Mr.  Gregory. — We  take  the  cargoes  and  see  what  the  cargoes  call 
for,  figure  up  the  number  of  cargoes  we  have  in  the  elevator  and  if 
those  cargoes  call  for  so  much  grain,  we  re-weigh  that  grain  to  see 
rlmt  our  outstanding  warehouse  receipts  are  properly  taken  care  of. 


842 

Mr.  Ward. —  Then  what  ?  When  you  find  that  your  outstanding 
warehouse  receipts  are  properly  taken  care  of  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Then  if  we  have  gotten  everything  cleaned  up, 
if  there  is  any  little  surplus  there,  we  figure  it  belongs  to  the  ele- 
vator and  we  dispose  of  it.  I  could  not  say  how  often  we  do  that 
without  looking  back. 

A  man,  Mr.  J.  E.  Finley,  is  superintendent  of  our  weighing 
men ;  we  have  a  number  of  them.  He  is  not  there  when  all  weigh- 
ing is  done.  Our  instructions  are.  to  give  everybody  all  that  is 
coming  to  them  and  I  know  what  the  reputation  of  the  elevator  is. 
The  scale  beam  on  a  big  scale  of  this  kind,  if  it  comes  up  very 
strong  you  are  gone,  that  is  all.  If  you  bring  that  beam  up  strong 
every  time  you  weigh  out  a  car,  you  wouldn't  have  grain  enough  in 
the  elevator  to  cover  the  warehouse  receipts.  It  is  rather  a  delicate 
job  to  get  a  fair  balance.  The  weigh  man  must  prevent  its  going 
up  strong;  it  is  part  of  his  duty;  it  is  adjusted  so  that  a  nice  bal- 
ance can  be  readily  obtained,  and  it  is  the  weigh  man's  duty  to  get 
that  nice  balance.  It  can  be  graduated  down  to  a  pound. 

Mr.  Ward. — Do  elevators  have  a  variegated  reputation  in  this 
respect  ? 

Mr.  Gregory. — Well,  I  wouldn't  want  to  answer  that  question ; 
it  would  put  me  in  a  position  that  I  don't  want  to  be  in. 

Mr.  Ward. — I  suppose  that  with  the  soulful  desire  to  accumu- 
late a  surplus  this  two  or  three  thousand  bushel  might  be  readily 
run  up  to  ten  thousand. 

Mr.  Gregory. —  You  could  do  that,  but  that  would  be  absolutely 
stealing.  That  would  be  premeditated  robbery.  There  would  have 
to  be  a  foregone  thought  to  steal  to  do  that.  The  surplus  that  is 
accumulated  by  us  is  entirely  incidental  to  the  operation  of  the  busi- 
ness and  not  deliberate  and  purposeful  light  balance.  By  a  little 
manipulation,  the  accumulation  could  be  largely  increased.  If  you 
want  to  go  on  and  steal  that  stuff  you  could  steal  it  and  still  be 
doing  business,  but  after  a  time  the  men  who  sell  the  grain  in  the 
first  place  would  not  put  any  more  grain  in  your  elevator,  so  you 
wouldn't  have  any  business.  Of  course,  there  are  a  lot  of  grain 
men  and  there  are  times  when  no  elevator  will  be  empty.  Fifteen 


84.3 

thousand  bushels  of  grain  would  be  a  very  unusual  amount  of  grain 
for  anybody  to  put  in  the  elevator.  The  amount  would  be  larger. 
Some  of  the  boats  that  come  to  Buffalo  bring  six  hundred  thousand 
bushels  of  grain.  Five  hundred  thousand  bushel  would  be  a  more 
representative  amount  to  be  stored  in  the  elevator  by  one  merchant. 
In  our  books  the  sales  of  grain  are  carried  into  earnings.  It  is 
not  kept  in  a  separate  account. 

GODFREY  MORGAN,  called  before  the  Committee,  testified : 
"  I  am  the  manager  of  the  Kellogg  Elevator  Company,  Gansen 

street,  in  the  city  of  Buffalo.    I  have  the  management  of  the  entire 

business  of  the  elevator  and  we  keep  books. 

"  We  make  a  trial  balance  and  we  can  get  that  trial  balance  for 

you." 

Mr.  Ward. — What  do  you  do  in  your  elevator  with  the  proceeds 
of  the  sales  of  surplus  grain  ? 

Mr.  Morgan. — We  put  them  into  an  account  called,  "  Over  and 
Short,"  That  account  is  in  the  books.  I  have  that  trial  balance  sheet 
here.  (Paper  admitted  in  evidence  and  marked  Committee  Ex- 
hibit 164.)  Exhibit  164  is  our  trial  balance  for  August  31st  We 
carry  in  this  trial  balance  this  account  from  the  1st  of  May,  1916. 
The  numerals  in  front  of  the  item  are  the  ledger  account  pages. 
Ledger  page  243  shows,  "  Over  and  Short,  $5,473.46."  That  rep- 
resents credits,  but  something  like  $4,000  of  that  was  recovered 
from  one  of  the  employees  who  had  been  stealing  grain  at  the  ele- 
vator, and  we  made  him  pay  that  back  for  the  theft ;  but  to  whom 
that  grain  belongs  I  don't  know  and  never  have  been  able  to  tell. 
The  grain  was  returned  to  us.  It  was  in  a  canal  boat  and  I  re- 
covered the  canal  boat,  brought  it  back  to  the  elevator  and  had  it 
re-elevated  and  it  is  through  this,  the  inventory  of  the  value  of  the 
grain  which  we  take  every  month  into  the  "  Over  and  Short "  ac- 
count. That  was  recovered  in  July. 

Our  June  trial  balance  showed  about  $1,000  overage  from  the 
1st  of  May,  from  May  the  1st  of  this  year,  so  that  the  accumula- 
tion from  May  1st  to  June  31st  would  be  about  $500  a  month.  The 
dust  account  is  for  dust  which  we  have  sold  from  the  elevator.  We 
gather  the  dust  from  all  over  the  elevator,  put  it  in  bags,  and  it 
now  has  a  slight  market  value.  We  sold  $183.04  worth.  That  is 


probably  two  carloads.  It  Is  put  into  the  molasses  foods  to  be  sold 
to  dairymen  for  cattle.  It  looks  like  ordinary  dust  to  me.  It  doe* 
not  require  any  grinding;  it  is  j.ust  mixed  in  what  they  call  th@ 
molasses  food.  I  am  just  telling  you  hearsay  on  this.  That  is  the 
information  I  have  about  it. 

There  is  another  item  there,  the  grain  account  of  $5,045.  That 
is  grain  as  against  the  over  and  short  account.  It  is  an  asset.  We 
keep  that  separately. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  is  on  page  154,  we  find  grain  account,  $5,645. 
What  is  that  ? 

Mr.  Morgan. — That  is  just  a  book  charge.  I  don't  know;  thai 
must  be  the  grain  earnings  probably. 

Mr.  Ward. — That  is,  sales  of  grain  ? 

Mr.  Morgan. — Sales  of  grain,  yes. 

Mr.  Ward. — Do  you  know  where  these  sales  came  from  ? 

Mr.  Morgan. — No,  I  don't;  I  presume  partially  from  overages; 
mostly,  I  presume,  from  overages.  These  overages  came  from  sur- 
plus, after  the  shipping  orders  represented  by  the  receipts  are  filled. 
We  weigh  all  the  grain  as  it  comes  in. 

Mr.  Ward. — Well,  now,  we  find  mill  men  saying  sueh  things  as 
this:  On  September  4,  1913,  car  number  109,791  on  the  New 
York  Central  was  short  485  pounds  of  containing  60,000  pounds 
of  wheat,  and  on  September  13th,  car  number  75,079  on  the  West 
Shore  Railroad  was  short  1,540  pounds  of  wheat.  Now,  how  would 
you  say  that  happened  ? 

Mr.  Morgan. — I  don't  think  anybody  can  say  how  those  things 
happen  and  be  definite  about  it.  I  don't  believe  that  two  scales 
ever  weigh  alike.  I  don't  believe  that  the  grain  weighed  twice  over 
ever  weighs  alike.  I  think  the  mistake  is  more  apt,  a  great  deal, 
to  be  at  the  other  end  than  it  is  at  the  Buffalo  end. 

Mr.  Ward. — If  the  mistake  was  always  at  the  other  end  you 
would  not  have  this  over  and  short  account. 

Mr.  Morgan. — No,  that  is  absolutely  true. 

Mr.  Ward. — So  that  the  mistake  must  sometimes  come  at  your 
end  ? 


845 

Mr.  Morgan. — Undoubtedly,  it  does.  We  use  any  bin  for  the 
overages.  We  have  sixty  bins  in  our  house.  A  car  of  corn  weighs 
56,000  pounds  and  we  aim  to  deliver  that  for  a  car.  The  Clear- 
ance Association  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  out-store  grain;  that 
only  regulates  the  in-store  grain.  If  we  found  we  had  some  corn 
over,  we  wouldn't  know  who  to  credit  it  to. 

Our  scales  weigh  60,000  pounds  at  a  draft.  A  slight  difference 
in  the  location  of  the  beam  would  not  represent  a  couple  of  hun- 
dred pounds.  You  are  supposed  to  be  particular  not  to  over-weigh 
or  under-weigh. 

The  railroads,  who  handle  export  grain,  will  not  take  the  Buffalo 
elevator  weights  as  they  are  held  responsible  for  any  shortage,  so 
the  Trunk  Line  Association  superintends  the  weighing  of  all  cars 
that  go  to  New  York  for  export,  but  local  business  throughout  the 
State  that  goes  to  dealers  or  others,  the  Trunk  Line  Association 
pays  no  attention  to.  We  make  no  practice  of  settling  claims  for 
shortages  on  cars. 

JAMES  A.  STEVENSON,  called  as  a  witness,  testified : 
"  I  live  in  Buffalo  and  am  manager  of  the  Mutual  Elevator. 
That  is  owned  by  the  Mutual  Terminal  Company  of  Buffalo. 

:i  We  have  some  surplus  of  grain.  That  has  been  sold  and  put 
into  the  earnings ;  we  put  it  into  the  miscellaneous  earnings.  We 
had  no  accounts  of  overs  and  shorts  but  we  have  had  shortages. 
When  we  had  shortages  we  filled  them  from  the  overs,  or  paid  for 
them.  We  handle  a  great  deal  of  grain  and  if  the  owners  consent 
we  deliver  in  kind.  We  sometimes  have  considerable  overages,  but 
how  much  I  couldn't  tell  you  offhand.  Any  shortages  in  our  eleva- 
tor are  very  small  and  are  taken  care  of." 

CONCLUSION 

From  the  above  testimony,  it  clearly  appears  that  carload  lots  of 
grain  are  shipped  out  from  certain  Buffalo  elevators  short  of  their 
required  amount ;  that  substantial  amounts  of  this  grain  remain  in 
the  elevators  and  are  made  a  source  of  profit  from  elevator  opera- 
tions. The  admission  that  in  one  elevator  three  thousand  bushels 
of  wheat  had  been  accumulated  in  this  way  in  one  season  and  ap- 
plied to  the  profits  of  the  elevator,  while  in  another  $10,000  had 


846 

been  accumulated  in  one  year  from  sales  of  such  grain,  shows  suffi- 
cient justification  for  the  complaint  that  systematic  shortages  are 
permitted  to  exist.  It  is  suggested  that  this  is  only  one  form  of 
abuse  to  which  the  traffic  in  foods  and  feed  stuffs  is  subjected  in 
this  State.  These  abuses,  while  small  in  themselves,  exist  at  many 
points  and  in  all  sorts  of  food  traffic.  Taken  separately,  they  are 
not  of  sufficient  importance  perhaps  to  secure  attention  from  the 
State,  but  taken  as  a  whole  this  multitude  of  abuses  and  little 
frauds  becomes  a  considerable  burden  upon  the  consumer  and 
producer. 

For  this  reason,  it  suggests  itself  that  a  comprehensive  State 
Department,  equipped  to  examine  into  and  make  public  all  sorts 
of  ill-practices  of  this  sort,  will  in  itself,  afford  an  effectual 
remedy  for  a  greater  part  of  them.  It  would  seem  that  this  is  an 
end  greatly  to  be  desired.  The  expense  of  such  a  department  will 
be  returned  to  the  people  of  this  State  many  times  by  saving  the 
producer  and  consumer  from  a  multitude  of  petty  thefts,  frauds, 
impositions  and  oppressions  from  which  at  this  time  they  have  no 
protection,  except  a  resort  to  the  courts  of  law.  But  a  resort  to  the 
law  courts  affords  no  remedy  to  the  ordinary  individual  in  such 
cases,  lie  can  afford  neither  the  time  nor  the  money  and  he  suffers 
the  imposition  in  silence  while  the  crafty  and  the  cunning  by  these 
collective  impositions  secure  substantial  profits,  all  of  which  prac- 
tices become  an  ultimate  burden  upon  the  consumer  and  tend  to 
increase  the  cost  of  living. 

POULTRY  A^D  POULTRY  PRODUCTS 

This  Committee  has  not  been  able  to  give  extensive  consideration 
either  to  the  production  or  distribution  of  dressed  poultry  or  eggs 
in  the  State,  from  the  fact  that  nearly  each  day  its  time  has  been 
devoted  to  the  more  pressing  problems  which  are  referred  to  in  this 
report.  This  question  is  one  with  which  the  people  of  our  cities, 
and  especially  the  people  of  the  city  of  New  York,  are  greatly  con- 
cerned. Dressed  poultry  and  eggs  is  one  of  the  most  important 
part  of  the  food  supply  of  the  larger  cities.  The  amount  of 
business  in  these  products  is  enormous.  For  several  years  past, 
it  seems  that  no  branch  of  feed  supply  has  been  in  sio  troubled  a 
condition  as  the  preparation  and  distribution  of  poultry  and 


847 

eggs.  The  lower  courts  in  the  city  of  New  York  and  the  grand 
juries  of  the  county,  have  during  later  years  devoted  a  great  deal 
of  time  and  money  in  attempts  to  remedy  existing  conditions.  The 
Committee  regrets  that  up  to  this  time  it  has  been  unable  to  go 
into  this  matter. 

Without  a  full  and  complete  understanding  of  the  conditions 
surrounding  the  traffic,  the  Committee  is  unable  to  make  any 
suggestions  as  to  possible  remedy  for  the  troublesome  features. 
The  legislation  here  proposed  should  be  able  to  afford  to  the 
people  of  the  cities  a  thorough  understanding  and  competent 
dealing  with  the  questions  involved.  It  is  recommended  that  in 
considering  legislation  to  be  advanced  for  this  purpose,  that  those 
difficulties  encountered  by  the  people  of  the  city  of  New  York  in 
securing  at  reasonable  price  an  adequate  supply  of  dressed  poultry 
for  its  inhabitants,  should  be  borne  in  mind  and  means  and  facili- 
ties provided  to  afford  relief.  Of  course,  this  suggestion  applies  in 
a  larger  sense  to  all  products  necessary  for  the  comfort  and  well- 
being  of  the  inhabitants  not  only  of  New  York  city,  but  of  the 
other  cities  of  the  State.  It  is  because  of  this  that  the  Commit- 
tee finds  itself  charged  with  the  duty  of  preparing  and  recommend- 
ing legislation,  which  shall  not  only  provide  remedies  for  existing 
ills  in  the  'matter  of  dairy  products,  but  shall  apply  and  afford 
relief  so  far  as  possible  to  the  entire  question  of  the  food  supply  of 
this  State.  To  attempt  to  recommend  legislation  applicable  only 
to  dairy  products  and  poultry  would  be  to  attempt  to  act  upon 
only  a  part  of  food  products,  which,  however  important  in  them- 
selves, yet  readily  lend  themselves  to  remedies  which  are  designed 
to  reach  the  entire  food  situation  in  this  State. 

EGG  AND  BUTTER  INVESTIGATION 

The  Committee  has  been  unable  to  give  any  of  its  time  to  the 
investigation  of  the  alleged  evil  practices  of  commission  men  and 
of  the  butter  and  egg  trade.  It  has,  however,  examined  into  the 
report  of  Hon.  Edward  R.  O'Malley  im  the  present  proceedings  in- 
stituted on  the  petition  of  the  Attorney-General  and  has  also  had 
access  to  the  record  of  those  proceedings  and  the  evidence  and 
exhibits  introduced.  It  has,  therefore,  believed  that  it  is  proper 
to  include  as  part  of  this  report  the  referee's  report  in  that  proceed- 


848 

ing.  This  report  suggests  strongly  that  conditions  prevail  in  the 
distribution  of  food  stuffs  to  the  people  of  the  city  of  New  York 
and  devices  affecting  the  market  price  thereof  are  operated  which 
the  State  should  no  longer  permit.  In  preparing  the  legislation,  as 
instructed  by  the  Legislature,  this  Committee  has  in  mind  the  con- 
clusions reached  by  the  referee  in  this  report,  and  the  proposed 
legislation  is  especially  designed  to  effectually  restrain  and  pre- 
vent the  evil  practices  and  methods  there  found  to  exist.  To  at- 
tempt to  remedy  existing  evils  in  the  distribution  of  dairy  products 
without  including  therein  matters  such  as  are  shown  to  exist  in 
this  report,  would  be  a  mistake.  With  this  consideration  in  view, 
the  Committee  appointed  by  the  Legislature  has  taken  up  the 
matter  of  appropriate  legislation  with  the  Mayor's  Committee  of 
the  city  of  New  York,  and  with  a  committee  appointed  by  the 
Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York.  After  giving  the  subjects  in 
hand  as  full  a  consideration  as  the  time  permitted,  the  three  com- 
mittees designated  as  Governor  Whitman's  Market  Commission, 
Mayor  MitchePs  Food  Supply  Committee,  and  the  Wicks  Legis- 
lative Committee,  have  joined  in  a  report  which  has  heretofore 
been  made  and  which  is  included  in  and  made  a  part  hereof. 


849 


REFER,}-:  F'S  REPORT  IX  THE  BUTTER.  AND  EGG   !X\  KSTIOATIOX 
SUPREME  COURT — COUNTY  or  XFW  YORK. 


Ix  THE  MATTER 
of 


The  Petition  of  JAMES  A.  PARSONS,  Attorney- 
General  of  the  State  of  New  York,  for  an  order 
directing  certain  persons  to  appear  before  a 
Referee  for  examination,  pursuant  to  chapter 
25  of  the  Laws  of  1009,  as  amended,  being  an 
Act  "  Relating  to  General  Business  "  constitut- 
ing chapter  25  of  the  Consolidated  Laws,  and 
entitled  "  General  Business  Law/'  in  effect  Feb- 
ruary 17,  1900,  and  particularly  article  22  of 
said  chapter. 


Hon.  EGBURT  E.  WOODBURY,  Attorney-General,  State  of  New  York: 

Dear  Sir. — On%0ctober  9,  1914,  your  predecessor,  the  Hon.  James  A.  Parsons, 
on  a  petition  as  Attorney-General,  instituted  a  proceeding  in  the  Supreme 
Court,  Xow  York  county,  and  secured  an  order  from  Hon.  John  Ford,  one  of 
the  Justices  of  said  Court,  directing  that  certain  persons  appear  before  the 
referee  to  be  named  for  examination  pursuant  to  chapter  25  of  the  Laws  of 
1909  as  amended,  constituting  chapter  25  of  the  Consolidated  Laws  and 
entitled  "  General  Business  Law."  By  said  order,  I  was  appointed  referee  to 
take  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses  referred  to  in  the  petition  and  also  such 
other  witnesses  as-  might  be  subsequently  ordered  to  appear  in  said  proceeding 
to  be  examined.  The  first  hearing  under  said  order  was  held  on  the  22<d  day 
of  October,  1914,  in  the  office  of  the  Attorney-General,  299  Broadway,  and 
were  continued  until  on  or  about  the  17th  day  of  December,  1915,  when  the 
evidence  was  closed.  Deputy  Attorney-general  Franklin  Kennedy  represented 
the  State  on  said  hearings  until  about  the  20th  day  of  January,  Ifllo,  when, 
owing  to  other  engagements  and  a  subsequent  illness,  he  was  unable  to  pro- 
ceed further,  which  caused  the  delay  in  the  taking  of  the  testimony.  Deputy 
Attorney-General  Alfred  L.  Becker  thereafter  took  charge  of  the  matter  and 
closed  the  testimony  December  17,  1915. 

The  petition  of  the  Attorney-General,  among  other  things,  alleged  that  it 
had  been  determined  to  commence  an  action  or  proceeding  under  section  342.  of 
the  General  Business  Law  and  under  section  131  of  the  General  Corporation 
Law  for  the  annulment  of  the  charters  of  certain  corporations'  therein  men- 
tioned, but  particularly  the  Xew  York  Mercantile  Exchange,  and  further  to 
bring  actions  against  certain  foreign  corporations  under  section  1948  of  the 
Code  of  Civil  Procedure. 

The  petition  alleged  that  the  Xew  \rork  Mercantile  Exchange  was  a  domestic 
corporation  and  its  by-laws  states  the  object  of  the  association  to  be  to  incul- 
cate equitable  principles  of  trade,  establish,  uniformity  in  commercial  usages, 
disseminate  among  its  members  business  information,  reform  abuses  and  pro- 


850 

tect  the  trade  against  unlawful  exactions,  adjust  differences  between  the  mem- 
bers and  promote  good  fellowship  and  friendly  intercourse  among  them,  but 
that  in  fact  the  Exchange  has  by  fixing  and  designating  the  grades'  and  classi- 
fying the  quality  of  the  butter  and  eggs  received  on  the  market  in  N"ew  York 
city,  by  manipulating  offers  and  bids  for  butter  and  eggs  under  the  "  Call  " 
and  by  permitting  many  of  the  sales  under  the  "  Call  "  to  consist  of  "  washed  " 
sales  it  has  illegally  and'  fraudulently  affected  the  market  for  butter  and  eggs 
for  the  personal  benefit  of  a  small  percentage  of  the  persons,  firms,  and  cor- 
porations having  a  controling  interest  in  the  Exchange;  that  the  sales  under 
the  "  Call  "  were  false  and  fraudulent  and  not  representative  of  the  selling 
values  of  either  butter  or  eggs  in  the  New  York  market  and  are  in  many 
instances  issued  to  deceive  the  producers  on  one  hand  and  the  general  con- 
suming public  on  the  other  hand. 

That  between  the  years  of  1903  and  l'SO'7  there  existed  as  a  .part  of  the 
machinery  of  the  Exchange  what  was  known  as  the  Butter,  Egg  and  Cheese 
Quotation  Committees,  whose  duty  it  was  to  establish  quotations  on  all 
grades  of  butter,  eggs  and  cheese  and  have  the  same  posted  daily  on  the 
bulletin  board  of  the  Exchange.  These  daily  quotations  were  published  in 
the  "Producers'  Price  Current"  as  the  official  quotations'  of  the  Exchange; 
that  said  quotation  committees  discontinued  the  practice  of  recording,  making 
and  publishing  these  quotations  after  August  7,  1907,  because  of  a  judgment 
of  the  Supreme  Court  restraining  them  from  so  doing.  This  judgment  was 
entered  in  an  action  brought  by  E'.  'E.  Martin,  a  member  of  the  Exchange,  who 
charged  that  the  recorded  and  published  quotations  of  the  butter  comiinittee 
were  false  and  fraudulent  and  not  representative  of  the  selling  values  of  butter 
obtainable  from  wholesale  transact  ions  at  first  hand  and  that  the  quoted  butter 
prices  were  from  *4  of  a  cent  to  I1/!  cents  lower  than'  the  true  market  value. 

It  is  further  alleged  that  the  Exchange  obeyed  this  injunction  until  about 
January  9,  19'08,  when  its  quotation  committees  were  reorganized  and  pub- 
lished quotations  as  before,  that  on  June  7-,  1909,  a  committee  appointed  by 
Governor  Hughes  and  known  as  the  "Governor's  Committee  on  Speculation 
in  'Securities  and  Commodities "  reported  that  while  the  quotations  of  the 
products  appearing  in  these  Exchanges  (Mercantile  and  Metal)  are  printed 
daily  in  the  public  press,  they  are  not  a  record  of  actual  transactions  amongst 
the  members  either  for  immediate  or  future  delivery;  that  upon  the  '"'Calls" 
sales  are  confessedly  rare  and  that  the  committees  were  actually  close  corpora- 
tions of  the  buyers  of  butter  and  eggs  and  the  prices  really  represented  their 
views'  as  to  the  rates  at  which  the  trade  generally  were  ready  to  buy  butter 
and  eggs  from  the  farmers  and  country  dealers. 

On  or  about  August  2$,  1909',  the  Exchange  having  been  advised  of  the 
report  of  the  Governor's  'Committee,  again  dissolved  its  quotation  committees. 

That  thereafter  the  Exchange  established  what  may  be  called  the  "  Urner- 
Barry  Price  Mechanism'"  through  the  medium  of  the  "Producers'  Price 
Current."  Representatives  of  this  publication  each  day  called  on  five  or  six 
firms  or  corporations  engaged  in  the  egg  and  butter  business  at  their  places  of 
business1  regarding  p-rices  and  made  similar  inquiries  of  other  dealers  on  the 
floor  of  the  Exchange  and  also  ascertained  information  of  the  relative  move- 
ment of  eggs  and  butter  the  day  before  and  made  inquiries  of  the  prices 
obtained  for  sales  under  the  "  Call."  Each  day's  quotations  were  made  and 


851 

posted  on  the  bulletin  board  of  the  Exchange.    These  were  the  official  quota- 
tions for  the  day. 

It  is  further  alleged  that  in  3912  the  District  Attorney  of  New  York  county 
instituted  a  John  Doe  proceeding  to  inquire  into  the  practices  of  the  Exchange 
regarding  the  matters  aforesaid,  the  result  of  which  was  that  the  Exchange 
discontinued  the  practice  of  posting  quotations  on  the  bulletin  boards'  of  the 
Exchange  which  satisfied  the  demands  of  the  District  Attorney.  No  official 
price  quotations  have  been  posted  by  the  Exchange  since  that  time,  but  it  is 
alleged  that  the  same  results  have  been  obtained  through  the  continued  publi- 
cation of  quotations  in  the  Producers'  Price  Current  which  has  continued  ever 
since  to  publish  quotations  of  the  prevailing  prices  which  are  geneerally 
accepted  as  the  prices  established  by  the  'Exchange.  It  is  alleged  that  the 
Exchange  is  not  maintained  for  the  purpose  set  forth  in  its  by-laws,  but  is 
nothing  more  or  less  than  a  conference  of  big  dealers  who  disseminate  infor- 
mation and  misinformation  with  respect  to  prevailing  prices  and  that  by  con- 
cert of  action  the  Exchange  possesses  the  power  through  the  instrumentality 
of  the  "  Call  "  to  inflate  or  depress  prices  and  that  through  the  "Producers' 
Price  Current,"  the  proprietors  of  which  are  members  of  the  Exchange,  the 
Exchange  carries  on  the  same  practices  it  did  formerly  by  virtue  of  its  quota- 
tation  committees. 

The  petition  further  sets  forth  the  names  of  the  members  of  the  committees 
of  the  Exchange  for  1913  and  1914  together  with  a  list  of  all  the  members  of 
the  Exchange. 

It  further  sets  forth  briefly  the  substance  of  sections  90-143)  of  the  General 
Business  Law  relative  to  regulating  the  general  business  of  warehousemen, 
and  section  L6-A  of  the  Public  Health  Law,  relative  to  regulating  the  cold 
storage  of  food  and  cold-storage  wareliouses  and  calls  attention  to  the  provision 
that  cold  storage  food  shall  not  be  kept  for  a  longer  period  than  ten  months 
except  butter  products  and  that  the  State  Commissioner  of  Health  is  vested 
with  full  power  to  inspect  and  supervise  all  places  used  for  cold  storage  or 
refrigerators  and  to  make  rules  and  regulations  for  their  proper  conduct,  and 
setting  forth  a  list  of  the  cold  storage  wareliouses  in  the  city  of  New  York 
subject  to  the  provisions  of  such  acts. 

The  petition  further  alleges  that  by  storing  enormous  quantities  of  eggs 
in  cold  storage  warehouses  during  times  of  great  productivity  and  keeping 
them  stored  until  times  of  less  productivity  the  price  of  eggs'  is  thereby 
affected. 

The  petition  further  alleges  that  the  great  packing  houses  own  and  ship 
more  than  50  per  cent,  of  the  eggs  reaching  the  New  York  market;  that 
these  com'panies  gather  eggs  from  all  sections  of  the  country  and  store  them 
in  the  warehouses  in  Chicago  and  at  other  western  points  and  then  ship  these 
eggs  to  New  York  at  their  pleasure  and  are  not  subject  to1  the  supervision  of 
oiff~public  health  laws,  and  that  an  inferior  quality  of  eggs  reaches  the  New 
York  market  without  being  subject  to  the  Public  Health  Law  of  the  State; 
that  said  packing  companies  assist  in  controlling  the  price  of  eggs  in  the  New 
York  market  and  that  there  is  some  kind  of  an  agreement  or  combination 
between  the  Exchange,  the  cold  storage  companies  and  the  packing  houses  and 
eggs  dealers  whereby  competition  in  the  supply  and  price  of  eggs  in  this  State 


852 

is  restrained  and  prevented,  which  agreement  is  contrary  to  law  and  illegal  and 
void. 

Upon  all  the  information  and  evidence-adduced  upon  said  hearings,  I  have 
deemed  it  advisable  to  report  to  you  the  most  important  things  which  have 
been  proven. 

The  object  of  said  Exchange,  as  set  forth  in  its  by-laws,  is  as  alleged  in  the 
petition  and  that  the  media  nibon  adopted  by  the  Exchange  for  making,  record- 
ing, posting  and  publishing  quotations  of  the  daily  market  value  of  eggs,  butter 
and  cheese,  through  its  quotation  committees  between  the  years  of  I9-03  and 
1907,  as  alleged  in  the  petition,  is  true. 

HISTORY  OF  LITIGATION,  INVESTIGATIONS  MADE  BY  GOVERNOR  HUGHES'  COM- 
MITTEE ON  SPECULATION  IN  SECURITIES  AND  COMMODITIES  AND  INVESTIGA- 
TION BY  THE  XEW  YORK  DISTRICT  ATTORNEY 

Martin  Action 

In  IIKXT  the  firm  of  G.  W.  Martin  &  Brother,  members  of  the  Exchange, 
brought  an  action  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  Kings  county  against  the  Exchange 
for  an  injunction  against  the  defendant  restraining  it  from  "  issuing  or 
publishing  quotations  of  the  values  in  the  New  York  wholesale  market  of 
any  of  the  grades  of  butter  at  other  than  the  selling  values  of  the  same, 
commonly  obtainable,  as  shown  by  wholesale  transactions1  at  first  hands." 
The  case  was  tried  in  May,  1007,  before  Mr.  Justice  W.  H.  Jaycox  at  a 
special  term  without  a  jury.  The  court  found  that  for  more  than  two  years 
last  past  the  defendant  had  issued  and  published  daily  quotations  of  the 
values  in  the  New  York  wholesale  market  of  the  different  grades  of  butter 
and  that  in  a  substantial  proportion  of  cases  those  quotations  were  "  untrue 
and  not  representative  of  the  selling  values  of  the  same,"  and  that  the  quo- 
tations for  a  certain  grade  of  butter  qualified  as  "  extras  "  were  in  a  vast 
majority  of  cases  "  untrue  and  not  representative  of  the  selling  values  of  the 
same,"  and  that  said  untruthful  quoting  of  the  market  by  the  defendant  was 
"wilful,  deliberate,  intentional,  fraudulent  and  systematic,"  and  that  such 
untruthful  quoting  of  the  market  was  a  violation  of  the  defendant's  char- 
ter requirement  that  it  diffuse  "  accurate  and  reliable  information."  There- 
upon the  court  gave  judgment  in  favor  of  the  plaintiff  restraining  the  defend- 
ant from  "  issuing  or  publishing  quotations  of  the  values  in  the  New  York 
wholesale  market  of  any  of  the  grades  of  butter,  at  other  than  the  selling 
values  of  the  same  commonly  obtainable  as  indicated  by  wholesale  transactions 
at  first  hands."  (Exhibit  21.) 

Following  this  decision,  the  Exchange  discontinued  making  and  publishing 
quotation®  through  its  quotation  committee  until  January,  1908,  when  its 
quotation  committees  were  reorganized  and  the  Exchange  contends  it  under- 
took to  publish  these  quotations  in  accordance  with  the  decision  of  the  court 
in  th«  Martin  case. 


853 

KKPORT  MADE  BY  GOVERNOR  HUGHES'  "COMMITTEE  ox  SPECULATION  IN  SECURI- 
TIES AND  COMMODITIES 

In  June,  1009,  Governor  Hughes  appointed  what  was  known  as  the  "  Gov- 
ernor's Committee  on  Speculation  in  Securities  and  Commodities."  The  mem- 
bers of  this  committee  were  men  of  the  highest  standing.  The  chairman 
was  Hon.  Horace  White  and  the  purpose  of  the  committee  was  to  ascertain 
"  what  changes,  if  any,  are  advisable  in  the  laws  of  the  State  bearing  upon 
speculation  in  securities  and  commodities,  or  relating  to  the  protection  of 
investors,  or  with  regard  to  the  instrumentalities  and  organizations  used 
in  dealings  in  securities  and  commodities  which  are  the  subject  of  specu- 
lation." The  committee's  report  to  the  (Governor  was  dated  June  7,  1909,  in 
which  the  committee  gave  its  opinion  that  the  "'  Mercantile  and  Metal 
Exchange  do  actual  harm  to  producers  and  consumers  and  that  their  char- 
ter should  be  repealed." 

Dealing  further  with  the  Mercantile  and  Metal  Exchanges,  the  report  says: 

"Although  quotations  of  the  products  appertaining  to  those  Exchanges 
are  printed  daily  in  the  public  press,  they  are  not  a  record  of  actual  trans- 
actions amongst  members,  either  for  immediate  or  future  delivery. 

It  is  true  that  on  the  Mercantile  Exchange  there  are  some  desultory 
operations  in  so-called  future  contracts  in  butter  and  eggs,  the  character 
of  which  is,  however,  revealed  by  the  fact  that  neither  delivery  by  the 
seller  nor  acceptance  by  the  buyer  is  obligatory,  the  contract  may  be 
voided  by  either  party  by  payment  of  a  maximum  penalty  of  five  per  cent. 
There  are  nominal  '  calls,'  but  trading  is  confessedly  rare.  The  published 
quotations  are  made  by  a  committee,  the  membership  of  which  is  changed 
periodically.  That  committee  is  actually  a  close  corporation.'  of  the 
buyers  of  butter  and  eggs  and  the  prices  were  to  represent  their  views-  as 
to  the  rates  at  which  the  trade  generally  should  be  ready  to  buy  from  the 
farmers  and  country  dealers. 

These  practices  result  in  deceiving  buyers  and  sellers.  The  making  and 
publishing  of  quotations  for  commodities  or  securities  by  groups  of  men 
calling  themselves  an  Exchange  or  by  any  similar  title,  Avhether  incor- 
porated or  not,  should  be  prohibited  by  law  where  such  quotations  do  not 
fairly  and  truthfully  represent  any  bona,  fide  transactions  on  such 
Exchanges.  Under  present  conditions,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  Mer- 
cantile and  Metal  Exchanges  do  actual  harm  to  producers  and  consumers 
and  that  their  charters  should  be  repealed." 

•  loiiN  DOE  PROCEEDING  BY  THE  DISTRICT  ATTORNEY  OF  NEW  YORK  COUNTY 
In  1912  the  district  attorney  of  New  York  county  filed  an  information  in  the 
nature  of  a  John  Doe  proceeding  entitled  "  City  Magistrate's  (Court,  First 
Division,  The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  plaintiff,  against  the  New 
York  Mercantile  Exchange,  defendant."  In  this  proceeding  an  inquiry  was 
made  into  certain  alleged  practices  of  the  Exchange  before  the  city  magistrate. 
No  determination  Was  made  in  said  proceeding  by  the  magistrate  nor  did  the 
district  attorney  take  any  action  other  than,  as  I  am  informed,  to  present  the 
evidence  to  the  grand  jury.  The  reason  why  the  district  attorney  did  not  take 
some  action  is  that  an  agreement  or  understanding  was  entered  into  by  him 
and  the  members  of  the  Exchange  to  the  effect  the  Exchange  would  discontinue 
certain  practices. 

Mr.  William  A.  DeFord,  assistant  district  attorney,  who  had  charge  of  the 
proceeding,  summarized  the  evidence  taken  in  the  proceeding,  and  among  other 
tilings  reported  that  the  members  of  the  Exchange  purchased  standard  grades 


854 

of  creamery  butter  under  prior  arrangements  subject  to  change  upon  notice 
whereby  they  paid  the  price  fixed  by  the  Exchange  through  its  published 
quotations  on  the  day  of  its  arrival  or  at  a  premium  or  advance  over  the  price 
fixed  by  the  Exchange,  and  that  the  members  of  the  Exchange  sold  butter  at 
the  price  fixed  by  the  Exchange  or  at  a  stated  advance  over  such  price,  and 
that  the  Exchange  price  as  published  was  the  basis  upon  which  its  members 
paid  for  butter  and  the  basis1  of  the  price  at  Avhich  they  sold  the  same;  that 
the  quotations  of  prices  for  butter  and  eggs  issued  by  the  Exchange  were  not 
based  upon  the  prices  at  which  sales  had  been  actually  made,  but  were  simply 
arbitrary  statements,  of  the  Exchange;  that  tbe  quotations  issued  were  under- 
stood to  be  quotations  of  prices,  which  quotations  were  issued  on  the  morning 
of  each  day  before  the  doing  of  any  business  on  that  day,  and  were  issued  as 
the  basis  of  that  day's  trading;  that  the  issuance  of  quotations  was  the  method 
adopted  by  the  members  of  the  Exchange  whereby  they  fixed  prices,  "  raising 
and  lowering  them  at  their  will  from  day  to  day  in  their  interests  at  which 
they  should  buy  and  at  which  they  should  sell  "  and  that  the  quotation  com- 
mittees were  a  "'mechanism  established  whereby  it  (the  Exchange)  fixed 
the  price  at  which,  within  the  limits1  of  a  partial  competition,  they  should  buy 
and  sell  an  article  or  commodity  of  common  use."  (Pp.  47—50.  Exhibit  16, 
pp.  106-109,  S.  M.) 

The  specific  things  which  the  Exchange  agreed  to  discontinue  with  the 
district  attorney  of  New  York  are  set  forth  in  Exhibit  1'7,  read  into  the  record 
at  pages  12-4-126,  8.  M.  Exhibit  17  is  a  resolution  passed  by  the  executive 
committee  of  the  Exchange  at  a  special  meeting  held  July  Ii8,  1912,  and  after 
a  recital  of  the  reasons  for  such  action,  as  set  forth  in  the  various  para- 
graphs of  the  preamble,  it  provided  as  follows: 

"RESOLVED:  That  the  Exchange  will  not  at  any  time,  directly  or 
indirectly,  by  any  .method  whatsoever,  make  or  publish  or  receive  from 
any  person,  firm  or  corporation  and  publish,  either  on  a  blackboard  on  the 
floor  of  the  Exchange  or  otherwise,  any  prices  or  quotations  of  the  prices 
of  butter,,  cheese  and  eggs  in  the  New  York  Market;  with  the  exception  of 
listing  and  recording  /prices  actually  received  for  lots  of  said  commodities 
at  boma  fide  sales  thereof  actually  made  upon  the  floor  of  the  Exchange, 
and  be  further 

RESOLVED:  That  the  Exchange  will  not  directly  or  indirectly,  either 
use  or  knowingly  permit  the  use  by  any  other  person,  of  it&  statistics1  of 
receipts  of  butter,  cheese  and  eggs  in  the  New  York  Market,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  and  publishing  quotations  of  market  value  or  prices  of 
any  of  said  connmodities  in  a  manner  contrary  to  law." 

THE    UBNER-BARKY  MECHANISM    SUBSTITUTED  FOB  THE!  QUOTATIONS   OF  THE 

COMMITTEES 

As  has  been  seen,  the  legality  of  making,  posting,  'publishing  and  issuing 
quotations  by  the  quotation  committees  of  the  Exchange  was  twice  brought  into 
question,  viz.,  in  IS'07  by  the  Martin  suit  and  in  1909  by  the  Governor's  Com- 
mittee before  referred  to.  Thereafter  what  is  known  as  the  Urner-Barry 
Mechanism  was  used  for  publishing  and  disseminating  information  through- 
out the  country  as  to  the  daily  price  of  butter  and  eggs  on  the  New  York 
market.  The  reason  for  the  existence  of  a  new  mechanism  of  some  kind  with 
which  to  furnish  quotations  of  the  markets  of  eggs  and  butter  is  apparent. 
Inasmuch  as  the  sales  of  butter  and  eggs  on  the  floor  of  the  Exchange  under 


855 

the  "  Call  "  were  insignificant  and  as  it  was  impossible  for  the  public  to  get 
reliable  or  any  information  based  upon  public  sales  on  the  Exchange,  it  was 
necessary  to  have  some  .mechanism  of" system  by  which  this  information  was 
fed  to  the  public,  and  since  the  publication  and  making  of  quotations  by 
quotation  committees  was  discontinued,  the  Urner-Barry  Company  furnished 
the  mechanism  by  which  this  information  was  disseminated.  The  Urner-Barry 
Company  during  all  the  times  mentioned  in  the  petition  published  a  daily 
market  report  which  was  circulated  among  the  dealers  and  known  as  the 
"  Producers'  Price  Current,"  The  evidence  shows  that  one  Frank  G.  Urner 
was  the  vice-president  of  this  company  and  one  of  its  employees  and  was  a 
member  of  the  Exchange  and  of  its  executive  committee  and  also  the  maker 
of  the  quotation®  on-  prices  on  eggs.  Mr.  Urner  made  the  quotations  for  the 
various  grades  of  eggs  which  has  been  established  by  the  Exchange,  and. 
posted  the  same  on  the  bulletin  board  of  the  Exchange.  In  getting  his  infor- 
mation as  to  the  market  price  of  eggs  on  any  particular  day  he  spent  from 
one  hour  to  an  hour  and  a  half  in  the  morning  interviewing  dealers  in  eggs 
at  their  places  of  business  and  also  upon  the  floor  of  the  Exchange  and  from 
the  information  so  gathered,  he  formed  his  conclusions  as  to  what  was  the 
market  value  of  eggs  on  that  day,  and  published  them  in  the  Urner-Barry 
publication. 

Mr.  William  C.  Taber  was  the  treasurer  of  the  Urner-Barry  Company  and 
in  its  employ  and  gathered  data  and  information  in  the  same  way  relative  to 
the  daily  market  prices  of  butter.  Mr.  Taber  was  also  a  member  of  the  Mer- 
cantile Exchange.  He  made  the  butter  price  quotations  published  in  the 
Urner-Barry  publication. 

The  quotations  published  by  the  Urner-Barry  Mechanism  are  furnished 
daily  and  published  in  thousands  of  papers  throughout  the  country,  which 
publications  are  members  of  the  Associated  Press.  These  quotations  are  fur- 
lushed  by  the  Urner-Barry  Company  to  the  Associated  Press  daily  and  sent 
out  to  all  morning  and  afternoon  papers  which  are  members  of  the  Associated 
Press.  This  information  is  disseminated  through  the  south  and  through  all 
the  central  states  as  far  west  as  Colorado.  They  therefore  become  the  quota- 
tions upon  which  the  producers  and  consumers  of  eggs  throughout  the 
country  are  guided.  (Testimony  of  Wilbur  Stewart,  629),  63*6  S.  M.,  Nov. 
9,  1914.) 

Leaving  out  of  consideration  for  the  moment  the  question  whether  the 
Exchange  has  an  agreement  with  Urner-Barry  people  to  perform  the  same 
services  of  making  and  publishing  quotations  in  butter  and  eggs  that 
the  quotation  committees  of  the  Exchange  had  performed,  there  is  no 
question  that  the  quotation®  made  by  the  Urner-Barry  people  fol- 
lowed the  grading  of  eggs  and  butter  made  by  the  Exchange  as  did  the 
quotation  committees.  The  information  obtained  by  the  Urner-Barry  Company 
was  the  same  information  obtained  by  the  committees.  The  quotations  were 
made  by  the  members  of  the  Exchange  and  after  consulting  with  other  mem- 
bers of  the  Exchange  and  were  reported  on  the  floor  of  the  Exchange  at  the 
eame  hour  each  day.  True  the  officials  of  the  Exchange  of  the  Urner-Barry 
Company  Avho  were  examined  by  the  Attorney-General  at  the  hearing  denied 
there  was  any  understanding  between  the  Exchange  and  the  Urner-Barry 
Company.  But  the  same  woik  was  carried  on  and  the  same  functions  per- 


850 

formed  as  was  carried  on  and  performed  by  the  quotation  committees,  the 
legality  of  which  has  been  challenged  theretofore,  and  I  therefore  think  it  i* 
a  fair  inference  that  there  was  some  kind  of  an  understanding  between  the 
Urner-Barry  people  and  the  Exchange  that  the  former  should  carry  on  the 
same  work  that  the  Exchange  had  carried  on  by  their  quotation  committees. 
Mr.  DeFord's  report  upon  this  branch  of  his  investigation  is  as  follows: 

"  The  Urner-Barry  quotation  device  was,  therefore,  simply  a  price  fixing 
device,  or  scheme  or  arrangement,  adopted  by  the  Exchange  to  perform 
the  function,  to  perform  for  the  benefit  of  the  members  of  the  Exchange, 
the  price  fixing  service  of  the  official  quotations  committees,  the  legality 
of  which  had  been  challenged  in  a  court  proceeding  and  by  a  legislative 
committee. 

The  Urner-Barry  quotations  were  made  and  published  by  members  of 
the  Exchange  upon  the  floor  of  the  Exchange  to  fix  the  price  of  the  com- 
modities in  which  the  members  of  the  Exchange  dealt,  is  open  to  all  the 
objections  of  illegality  to  which  the  operations  of  the  quotations  com- 
mittees themselves  were  subjected." 

INDICTMENTS  OF  MEMBERS  OF  THE  EXCHANGE  FOR  DEFRAUDING  THE  RAILROAD 
COMPANIES  BY  FILING  FALSE  CLAIMS  FOR  DAMAGES  OF  EGGS  AND  BRIBING 
THE  INSPECTORS  or  THE  RAILROAD  COMPANIES 

It  was  proven  in  1&1I2  that  the  individual  members  of  some  five  firms,  mem- 
bers of  the  Exchange,  were  indicted  for  defrauding  the  railroads  by  present- 
ing false  claims  for  the  breakage  in  eggs*  and  collecting  damages  thereon.  It 
seems  that  prior  to  I9091  the  railroad  companies  permitted  the  commission  mer- 
chants to  receipt  for  damaged  cases  of  eggs.  The  damage  claims  were  so, 
exorbitant  that  the  railroads'  made  a  rule  requiring  an  inspection  of  the  dam- 
aged cases  of  eggs  before  they  were  delivered  to  the  consignee,  which  was» 
done  by  a  joint  inspection  by  a  representative  of  the  railroads  and  of  the  con- 
signee. In  10 12  or  1913,  the  Trunk  Line  Association,  which  included  a  num- 
ber of  the  railroad  companies1  obtained  information  to  the  effect  that  certain 
commission  houses  were  paying  money  to  the  railroad  inspectors  to  induce  them, 
to  deliver  shipments  more  expeditiously  than  to  their  competitors,  and  also 
to  induce  the  inspectors  to  sign  a  receipt  showing  a  certain  number  of  broken, 
cracked  or  stained  eggs  without  making  any  examination.  This  information 
was  reported  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission.  The  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission,  through  Mr.  Frank  W.  Swacker,  (Special  Deputy  United 
States  Attorney-General,  conducted  an  investigation  with  the  result  that  a  num- 
ber of  firms  and  corporations  Avere  indicted  for  making  fraudulent  claims 
against  the  railroad  companies  for  broken  eggs,  and  also  for  violating  certain 
sections  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Act  in  paying  .money  to  inspectors  t« 
induce  inspectors  to  discriminate  in  their  favor.  All  of  these  firms  or  individ- 
ual members  thereof  and  corporations  pleaded  guilty  to  the  charge  of  alleged 
discrimination  and  each  paid  a  penalty  varying  from  $2,000  to  $12yOOO.  These 
indictments  were  found  by  a  Federal  Grand  Jury  arid  the  cases  were  dis- 
posed of  between  May  T6,  1913,  and  November  of  the  same  year.  (See  testi- 
mony William  S.  Meeks,  pp.  1873,  1959,  2007,  2023,  Vol.  Ill,  «.  M.;  also  testi- 
mony of  'William  Mann,  pp.  1D7G,  2017,  Vol.  HI,  S.  M.;  see  p.  "G,"  C.  E. 
Waits.) 

The  testimony  is  fully  set  forth  and  read  into  the  record  at  the  pages  above 
quoted.    The  minutes  of  the  executive  committee  show  the  official  action  takem 


857 


by  the  Exchange  regard  in*;1  this  matter.  Tlie  'Exchange  sus'ji  ended  all  the 
individuals  and  corporations  who  pleaded  guilty,  as  above  set  forth,  although 
•ther  members  of  some  of  the  firms  were  permitted  to  continue  members  of 
the  Exchange  and  to  transact  business  in  the  Exchange. 

The  criminal  prosecution  by  the  Federal  authorities  evidently  produced  an 
immediate  effect  upon  the  number  and  amount  of  claims  filed  against  the 
railroads  and  the  amount  paid  by  the  railroads  for  damaged  eggs.  The 
amount  of  claims  filed  from  February  13,  11912,  to  January  L,  1913,  were 
60,451  in  number;  $715,1 13.00  in  amount,  and  the  amount  paid  by  the  rail- 
roads in  settlement  Avas  $6:65,552.00  From  February  13,  1913,  to  January  1, 
1914,  claims  were  43,532  in  number,  $412,094.00  in  amount,  and  $14)1,562.00 
paid  for  damages.  (Table  of  C.  E.  Waite,  page  C.  6.) 

CONTRACT  OF  HKXNKNHKRCKII  &  BEHOLD  WITH  THE  UNITED  STATES  NAVY  AT 

BROOKLYN 

Under  the  rules  of  the  Exchange  regular  inspectors  of  butter  and  eggs  were 
employed  at  an  annual  salary.  In  the  early  part  of  the  year  1014,  one  Joseph 
H.  Barrett  was  the  inspector  of  the  Exchange  for  butter. 

On  or  about  May  23,  1914,  Hennenberger  &  Herold,  members  of  the  Exchange 
were  low  bidders  for  butter  under  specifications  advertised  for  by  the  navy 
department  of  the  Brooklyn  Xavy  Yard,  Brooklyn. 

The  specifications  provided  for  "  creamery  extras "  to  be  inspected  either 
by  a  representative  of  the  agricultural  department  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment, (Mr.  Fryhofer),  or  by  the  official  inspector  of  the  Exchange.  This 
paticular  quantity  of  butter  was  inspected  by  Mr.  Barrett.  His  examination 
showed  the  butter  to  be  of  "  creamery  extras "  and  he  so  stamped  the  tubs. 
When  the  butter  was  delivered  it  was  found  to  be  of  an  inferior  quality.  The 
authorities  at  the  Brooklyn  Navy  Yard  had  another  reinspeetion  of  the  butter 
and  found  that  it  was  'far  below  the  grade  certified  to  by  the  inspector  of  the 
Exchange.  Mr.  F.  G.  Henry,  superintendent  of  the  Exchange,  testified  upon 
the  hearing  before  the  Exchange: 

"At  the  request  of  the  President,  I  Avent  to  the  Brooklyn  Navy  Yard  on 
May  20.  I  was  directed  to  look  at  the  stamps  on  the  butter  delivered  by 
Hennenberger  &  Herold  to  the  navy  yard,  and  which  was  then  loaded  on 
the  supply  ship  "  Celtic."  I  first  called  upon  Paymaster  Sanford  and  he 
put  me  in  charge  of  the  paymaster  on  board  of  the  ship  heretofore  men- 
tioned. I  was  taken  into  one  part  of  the  ship  and  found  250i  tubs  in  the 
refrigerator  room.  I  looked  at  fully  1(00  tubs,  and  found  every  tub 
stamped.  I  could  not  look  at  the  remaining  lots  as  they  were  piled  up 
to  such  an  extent,  that  they  were  not  easily  examined.  The  paymaster 
on  the  ship,  however,  assured  me  that  every  tub  had  been  stamped  and 
this  information  was  also  confirmed  by  Paymaster  Sanford.  They  stated 
that  they  would  not  have  accepted  the  butter  had  each  tub  not  been 
stamped.  I  found  in  my  examination  of  the  1'CO  tubs,  that  sonne  lots 
which  wrere  stamped  EXTRAS  on  the  tops1  and  sides-  were  very  legible. 
The  others  were  stamped  so  imperfectly  that  it  was  impossible  to  see  what 
the  brand  actually  did  show  at  time  it  was  impressed.  I  noticed  in  many 
lots  where  the  grade  had  been  inserted,  it  had  been  so  blurred  as  to  be 
illegible.  I  noticed  butter  dated  May  15  and  May  21i,  the  largest  num- 
ber being  the  latter  date.  The  records  of  the  Exchange  show  that  all  this 
butter  dated  May  15,  were  stamped  extras,  and  conformed  to  the  books 
of  the  Exchange.  I  returned  to  the  Exchange,  and  made  this  report  to 
the  President." 


858 

Q.  Is  dt  a  fact,  as  I  gather  from  this  evidence,  that  there  were  400  tubs 
of  butter  which  had  the  stamp  of  the  Mercantile  Exchange,  and  you  have 
no  record  of  inspection? 

A.    That  is  about  the  truth. 

Q.  And  have  you  any  idea  of  how  it  got  the  stamp  of  the  Mercantile 
Exchange? 

A.     We  were  never  able  to  find  out. 

Q.     Did  the  New  York  Mercantile  Exchange  ever  find  out? 

A.     No,  we  could  not  find  out." 

An  investigation  disclosed  that  it  was  impossible  to  tell  who  had  placed 
the  official  stamp  of  the  Exchange  on  the  various  tubs  of  butter  and  further 
that  the  stamps  had  been  erased  or  blurred  so  that  it  was  difficult  to  deter- 
mine what  grade  had  been  certified  to. 

Upon  ascertaining  these  facts,  the  Exchange  made  an  investigation  of  the 
whole  matter  with  the  result  that  the  members'  of  Hennenberger  &  Herold 
were  suspended  for  one  year  (p.  204),  and  Joseph  H.  Barrett  was  discharged 
from  his  position  as  official  inspector  (p.  206).  Within  a  year's  time  the 
Exchange  permitted  Barrett  to  be  duly  elected  member  of  the  Exchange  with 
all  the  rights1  and  privilegies  of  membership.  (Pp.  196—207,  'S.  M. ;  see  record 
of  trial  of  Hennenberger  &  Herold  read  into  the  record,  >pp.  225-<295  S.  M.) 

The  butter  so  purchased  was  to  go  to  the  sailors  at  Vera  Cruz.  Only  a 
small  percentage  of  butter  was  "  creamery  extras,"  according  to  Mr.  Fryhofer. 

PROCEEDING  BY  THE  UNITED  STATES  GOVERNMENT  AGAINST  THE  'CHICAGO  BUTTER 

AND  EGG  BOARD 

There  was-  some  evidence  tending  to  show  that  in  19 12  or  1913,  the  United 
States*  Government  instituted  criminal  proceedings  against  the  'Chicago  But- 
ter and  Egg  Board,  the  result  of  which  was  that  the  'Chicago  Board  was  com- 
pelled to  discontinue  the  -market  and  the  making  of  prices'  through  their  com- 
mittees and  restrained  from  publishing  quotations  of  prices  as  it  had  thereto- 
fore done.  (Pp.  175-176  S.  M.) 

TRADING  UNDER  THE  "  CALL  " 

That  the  trading  under  the  "  Call  "  does  not  have  any  true  bearing  on  the 
fixing  of  prices,  is  indicated  briefly  in  the  record  of  transactions  of  such  sales 
for  the  years  of  1912,  1913,  1914: 

Eggs 
1912' 

Number  of  cases  of  eggs  received  Sales  under  Call  Percentage 

in  New  York  City  Cases 

4,723,558  113,307  2.40 

1913 
4,666,117  104,500  2.24 

1914 
4,148,412  58,125  1.40 

Butter 

Number  of  tubs  of  butter  received  Sales  under  Call  Percentage 

in  New  York  City  Tubs 

1912 
2,434,069  28,001  1 . 15 

1013 
2,516,485  17,303  .69 

1914 
2,025,902  17,043  .84 


859 


There  was  no  evidence  offered  upon  the  question  of  whether  the  packing 
houses  and  cold  storage  warehouse  concerns  combined  with  the  members  of 
the  Exchange  or  other  large  dealers  for  the  purpose  of  advancing1  or  reducing 
the  market  iprice  of  eggs'  There  was  no  evidence  offered  upon  .the  question  of 
whether  the  storing  of  eggs  in  cold  storage  warehouses  or  by  the  packing- 
houses outside  the  State  of  New  York  resulted  in  producing  an  inferior  quality 
of  eggs  upon  the  New  York  market. 

It  is  only  fair  to  state  there  was  no  evidence  given  that  would  warrant  the 
conclusion  that  any  improper  or  fraudulent  dealings  with  state  institutions 
could  be  charged  up  to  the  Exchange  as  an  organization.  There  is  some  evi- 
dence that  members  of  the  Exchange  dealt  extensively  with  the  State  and  that 
disputes  arose  from  time  to  time.  Perhaps  some  of  these  were  fraudulent, 
but  in  my  judgment  they  should  not  be  charged  up  against  the  Exchange. 

OTHER  REPORTS  IN  THIS  PROCEEDING  MADE  TO  THE  ATTORNEY-GENERAL 
On  March  15,  19  M,  Mr.  C.  E.  Waite  made  a  report  to  you  upon  this  investi- 
gation. This  report  deals  with  facts  already  proved  in  the  proceeding  and 
also  things  that  in  his  judgment  could  be  proved  by  evidence  at  hand.  I  have 
deemed  it  advisable  to  incorporate  his  report  as  a  part  of  mine  so  that  you 
may  have  it  embodied  in  one  report  for  reference.  His  report  is  as  follows: 


IN  THE  MATTER 
of 

The  Petition  of  the  Attorney-General  of  the  State 
of  New  York,  for  an  order  directing  certain 
persons  to  appear  before  a  Referee  for  examina- 
tion pursuant  to  chapter  25  of  the  Laws  of  1'909, 
as  amended,  being  an  Act  "  Relating  to  General 
Business  "  constituting  chapter  25  of  the  Con- 
solidated Laws,  and  entitled  "General  Business 
Law,"  in  effect  February  IT,  1909',  and  par- 
ticularly article  22  of  said  chapter. 


Hon.  E.  E.  WOODBUBY,  Attorney-General  of  the  State  of  New  York: 

Sir. — Under  the  order  of  the  Supreme  Court,  dated  October  9,  1914,  appoint- 
ing Hon.  Edward  R.  O'Malley,  Referee  to  take  testimony  in  the  above  matter, 
commonly  referred  to  as  the  "  Butter  and  Egg  Investigation,"  I  beg  to  report 
as  follows: 

In  General 

First:  Beginning  with  October  22,  in-].-!.,  down  to  December  22,  1'914,  there 
have  been  hearings  on  eighteen  days,  fifty-seven  witnesses  have  testified  and 
2.030  pages  of  testimony  spread  on  the  record. 

Second:  The  facts  alleged  in  the  petition,  in  >o  far  as  they  refer  to  num- 
bers 1,  2,  '3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  8  and  13  (folios  9-  to  104  and  folio  1230)  have  been 
proved,  partly  by  the  testimony  of  witnesses  thus  far  examined,  partly  by 


860 

evidence  in  the  possession  of  the  investigators,  and  prior  to  April,  1912,  by 
the  evidence  brought  out  in  the  action  entitled  "The  People  of  the  State  of 
New  York  against  New  York  Mercantile  Exchange,"  tried  in  the  City  Magis- 
trate's Court,  First  Division. 

Third:  The  facts  alleged  in  the  petition,  numbers  9,  10,  11  and  12  (folios 
104  to  ]!23)  have  not  been  proved,  but  accumulated  evidence  in  the  'possession 
of  the  investigators  indicates  that  actual  proof  can  be  obtained. 

Fourth:  The  facts  alleged  in  number  14  (folio  124)  of  the  petition  have 
not  been  proved  by  the  discovery  of  an  actual  contract  or  agreement  in  writing 
or  of  any  arrangement  or  combination  of  record,  specifically  bearing  out  the 
allegation  that  competition  in  this  State  is  restrained  and  prevented  and  that 
a  monopoly  exists,  but  that  the  facts  as  alleged  are  true  and  can  be  proven 
is  set  out  in  the  following: 

Statements  of  Fact 
I. 

The  New  York  Mercantile  Exchange  is  an  institution  maintained  by  whole- 
sale dealers  in  butter,  eggs  and  cheese  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

It  'has  four  hundred  members  and  is  governed  by  a  president,  four  vice- 
presidents,  a  treasurer  and  a  secretary,  and  these  seven  officers,  in  addition 
to  eight  other  members,  constitute  the  executive  committee. 

The  executive  committee,  inclusive  of  the  officers  of  the  Exchange,  are 
elected  annually,  all  other  committees  being  appointed  by  the  executive 
committee. 

The  trade  committees1  (which  are  in  reality  governing  committees)  are  the 
butter  committee,  the  egg  committee  and  the  cheese  committee,  consisting  of 
seven  members  each. 

The  standing  committees  are  as  follows:  Finance,  three  members;  floor, 
three  members;  law,  three  members;  rooms,  property  and  fixtures,  three  mem- 
bers; admission,  eight  members;  complaint,  three  members;  information  and 
statistics,  three  members;  trade,  five  members;  arbitration,  tAvelve  members; 
export,  three  members. 

The  governing  committees  are,  therefore,  the  executive  committee  (including 
the  seven  officers)  numbering  fifteen  and.  the  trade  committee  numbering 
twenty-one,  or  a  total  of  thirty-six  members  who  control  the  affairs>  of  the 
institution.  The  standing  committees  number  forty-six,  making  a  total 
membership  of  all  committees  eighty-two. 

II 

In  the  various  phases  developed  in  the  course  of  this  investigation,  and  in 
the  searching  analysis  of  the  transactions  as1  shown  in  the  records  of  the 
Exchange  itself,  it  became  apparent  almost  from  the  first  that  a  dominating 
'faction  or  clique  existed,  and  as  the  control  of  the  operations  of  the  Exchange 
was  centered  in  the  governing  committees,  it  was  important  that  the  makeup 
of  these  committees  should  be  closely  dissected. 

It  appeared  to  me  that  individuals,  treated  as  committee  units,  by  named, 
would  not  produce  conclusive  results,  and  I  have  therefore,  in  all  statements 
•or  data,  where  the  action  of  a  committee  was  involved,  shown  the  makeup  of 


8G1 


the  committee  by  giving  the  name  of  the  firm  with  whom  the  member  of  the 
committee  was  connected. 

From  1907  down  to  and  including  1915  (a  period  of  nine  years)  there  were 
1.395  individual  services  on  various  committees.  In  lOOT-IOOS  and  to  August, 
1909,  the  quotation  committees  were  in  existence,  which  accounted  for  551  ser- 
vices on  the  quotation  committees  out  of  the  total  of  840  services  on  all  com- 
mittees by  all  members  for  the  two  years  and  seven  months. 

During  the  whole  period  of  nine  years,  however,  twenty-two  firms,  repre- 
sented by  forty-eight  individuals,  served  as  follows: 


Governing  Committees 

Holding  Office 

Executive  Committee   

Butter  Quotation  Committee. 
Butter  Quotation  Committee. 
Egg  Quotation  Committee.  .  .  , 
Egg  Quotation  Committee.  .  . 
Cheese  Quotation  Committee, 


Standing  Committees 


Total 
all 
members 

63 

Total 
48 
members 
22'  firms 
47 

Per  cent 
of 
service 

74%% 

13'5 

85 

63% 

277 

121 

43%% 

63 

41 

65% 

274 

121 

44% 

63 
63 

40 
18 

63% 
29% 

938 
457 

47'3 
293 

50% 

64% 

76>6 


55% 


The  number  of  services  by  firms  stood  at  senenteen  for  the  lowest  and  fifty- 
nine  for  the  highest.  The  service  by  individuals  ran  from  one  for  the  lowest 
to  fifty  for  the  highest. 

(See  Section  D.) 

The  makeup  of  all  committee  from  1901  to  19'li5  is1  spread  on  the  record 
Volume  4,  pages  2052  to  2077. 

The  fact  that  certain  firms  are  represented  year  after  year,  and  that  cer- 
tain individuals,  members  of,  employed  by,  or  closely  connected  with  these 
firms,  are  elected  as  officers  and  members  of  the  executive  committee  year 
after  year,  indicates  something  approaching  control. 

The  fact  that  all  members  of  the  trade  and  standing1  committees  are 
appointed  by  the  executive  committees  gives  a  power  to  the  fifteen  members 
serving  on  said  committee  which  emphasizes  this  control,  but  when  we  find 
that  during  the  last  nine  years,  out  of  the  twenty-two  firms  eighteen  members 
served  as  officers  forty-seven  times  out  of  a  possible  sixty-three  periods,  and 
twenty-nine  members  served  on  the  executive  committee  eighty-four  times  out 
of  a  possible  135  periods,  the  control  becomes,  if  anything,  more  pronounced. 

While  there  is  at  present  no  absolute  proof,  the  indications  are  that  certain 
firms  doing  a  very  large  business,  (in  one  instance,  large  contractors  to  the 
State,  namely,  Droste  &  Snyder )  and  who  are  rarely  represented  on  governing 
committees,  or  who  do  little  or  no  trading  under  the  "Call,"  are  in  fact, 
represented  by  other  interests  on  these  committees  and  trades  under  the 
"  Call "  are  transacted  for  them  by  their  nominees. 


862 
in 

My  reason  for  classing  the  butter  committee  and  the  egg  committee  as  gov- 
erning committees  is1  as  follows: 

Almost  without  exception  any  action  by  either  one  of  these  committees, 
Avhich  by  the  rules  of  the  Exchange  is  referred  to  the  executive  committee,  is 
dealt  with  by  the  executive  committee  in  conformity  with  the  recommendations 
of  the  committee  in  question. 

The  basis  of  all  trading  prices  is  dependent  on  the  scoring  of  butter  and 
the  grading  of  cggs>,  and  the  fixing  or  the  alteration  in  the  scoring  of  butter  by 
the  butter  committee  becomes  official  and  in  like  manner,  the  fixing  or  the 
alteration  in  the  grading  of  eggs'  by  the  eggs  committee  becomes  official,  and 
such  scoring  or  grading  is  accepted  by  shippers  and  the  trade  as  regulat- 
ing the  quality  of  goods'  required,  not  only  in  the  New  York  .market,  but 
wherever  the  quotations  as  published  in  the  Urner-Barry  Price  Current  are 
accepted  as  fixing  prices'. 

Since  it  he  quotations  committees  were  abolished  in  August,  1909,  the  butter 
committee  has  been  given  discretionary  -power  to  change  the  range  of  scoring 
for  creamery  butter,  and  the  egg  committee,  in  like  manner,  has  discretionary 
poAver  to  change  the  percentage  of  eggs,  of  the  quality  necessary  to  meet  the 
requirements  of  the  different  grades  of  those  classified  as  "  fresh  gathered," 
without  the  approval  of  such  action  by  the  executive  commdttee. 

IV 

Official  inspectors  are  appointed  by  the  butter  committee  and  by  the  egg 
committee  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  executive  committee,  and  these 
inspectors,  as  servants  of  >the  Exchange,  not  only  owe  their  appointment  but 
their  retention,  or  any  advancement  by  way  of  remuneration,  to  the  members 
of  the  committee  or  to  the  influence  of  allied  interests. 

It  is  the  duty  of  these  inspectors  to  inspect,  when  called  upon  to  do  so, 
either  at  the  receiver's  store,  or  at  a  cold  storage  warehouse,  or  such  other 
place  as  may  be  named,  such  butter  as  may  require  inspection  to  determine 
the  score.  (iSuch  scoring  indirectly  fixing  the  price) . 

Ordinarily,  or  when  any  dispute  arises  between  a  receiver  and  a  shipper,  or 
if  evidence  of  quality  is  necessary  and  a  certificate  of  inspection  is  required, 
a  certain  number  of  tubs,  generally  ten  per  cent,  is1  selected  from  a  consign- 
ment and  duly  inspected,  and  from  the  data  furnished  by  the  inspector  the 
superintendent  of  the  Mercantile  Exchange  issues  the  official  certificate. 

The  United  States  Government  and  the  State  of  New  York  requires  that 
all  butter  purchased  subject  to  the  inspection  by  the  Mercantile  Exchange 
shall  have  the  tubs  stamped  by  the  inspector,  showing  the  quality  or  grade 
purchased. 

The  .procedure  set  out  above  is  carried  out  in  the  essential  details  in  the 
grading  of  egg*. 

V 

In  the  Martin  litigation  it  was  proven  that  "  the  butter  quotation  com- 
mittee willfully,  deliberately,  fraudulently,  dishonestly,  maliciously  and  sys- 
tematically issued  and  published  daily  quotations  of  the  values  in  the  New 
York  wholesale  .market  of  the  different  grades  of  butter,  which  quotations 


863 

were  false,  fraudulent  and  not  representative  of  the  selling  values  of  the  same 
commodities  obtainable  from  wholesale  transactions  at  first  hands." 

While  the  quotation  committee  no  longer  exists,  in  all  other  respects  the 
machinery  is  in  order  for  manipulation.  The  butter  committee  and  the  egg 
committee  fixes  or  alters  the  score  or  grade  from  time  to  time,  or  should 
occasion  demand,  the  butter  committee  suspends  the  scoring  altogether. 

If  the  judgment  of  inspectors  can  be  influenced,  so  that  the  scoring  or  grad- 
ing can  be  altered  or  doctored  to  suit  individual  requirements,  the  manipulation 
of  the  "  Call  "  and  the  manipulation  of  quotations  is  necessary  only  to  pro- 
duce conditions  that  are  closely  analogous  to  those  existing  before  the  quota- 
tion committee  was  discontinued  under  an  injunction  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

There  is  proof  that  these  conditions  do,  in  fact,  exist. 

VI 

Both  F.  G.  Urner  and  William  C.  Taber,  officers  of  the  Urner-Barry  Co.,  and 
members  of  the  Mercantile  Exchange,  have  for  years  acted  as  the  market 
reporters  for  eggs  and  butter,  respectively,  and  their  reports  are  published  in 
the  Producers'  Price  Current. 

Prior  to  the  discontinuance  of  the  quotation  committee,  these  gentlemen 
served  on  them  and  entered  fully  into  all  discussions  as  to  fixing  prices,  and 
without  doubt,  largely  influenced  the  prices  ultimately  arrived  at. 

Since  the  discontinuance  of  the  quotation  committees,  instead  of  discussing 
conditions'  and  interchanging  opinions  in  committee,  where,  at  any  rate, 
decision  as  to  prices  arrived  at  were  miade  official  as  the  action  of  the  com- 
mittee as  a  whole,  Messers.  Urner  and  Taber  no\v  gather  such  information  as 
they  care  to  seek  from  memibers  on  the  floor  of  the  Exchange,  or  in  places  of 
business,  and  gave  at  all  times  due  consideration  to  the  "  bids  and  offerings  " 
and  sales  under  the  "  Call." 

The  effect,  therefore  has  been  that  while  the  prices  as  made  by  Urner 
and  Taber  are  not  the  official  quotations  of  the  Exchange,  nevertheless  they 
are  accepted  by  the  members  as  such  and  on  publication  in  the  Producers' 
Price  Current,  and,  by  arangement  with  the  Associated  Press,  published  in 
upwards  of  one  thousand  newspapers  in  the  United  States;  they  are  looked 
upon  by  shippers  all  over  the  country  as  the  market  price  in  New  York  on 
which  settlements  will  be  made. 

There  is  proof  that  the  Urner-Barry  mechanism  is  simply  a  price-fixing 
device  adopted  by  the  Exchange  to  perform  for  the  benefit  of  its-  memibers  the 
same  service  as  formerly  rendered  by  the  official  quotation  committee. 

Conclusion 

In  my  opinion,  there  is  (having  regard  to  the  testimony  already  given,  and 
the  further  proof  which  is  ready  to  offer  in  evidence)  a  monopoly  in  this  State 
in  the  sale  of  butter  and  eggs,  by  which  the  free  pursuit  in  this  State  of  the 
lawful  business,  trade,  and  occupation  of  selling  and  dealing  in  eggs  is 

restricted  and  prevented. 

Respectfully  submitted. 

Under  date  of  March  2,  1915,  Messrs.  M.  &  L.  W.  'Shudder,  certified  account- 
ants, who  were  employed  by  the  Attorney-General  in  this  investigation  also 
made  a  report  to  you  covering  not  only  the  testimony  offered  before  me,  but 


SOi 

covering  the  investigation  which  the  accountants  conducted  outside  of  the 
hearings.  I  have  read  this  report  carefully  and  so  far  as  it  deals  with  mat- 
ters upon  which  evidence  was  introduced  before  me,  it  is.  in  the  main  correct. 
In  so  far  as  it  discusses  information  and  knowledge  obtained  outside  of  the 
hearings  by  the  accountants,  I  would  not  care  to  adopt  the  conclusions  of  the 
accountants  as  set  forth  therein.  Their  report  is  as  follows:  (Insert 
Accountants'  Report  No.  16,  if  it  is  the  wish  of  the  Attorney-General.) 

From,  all  the  evidence  and  information  adduced  and  brought  out  upon  the 
hearings,  the  following  facts  have  been  established: 

1.  That  the  making,  posting  and  publication  of  the  quotations  of  the  daily 
prices  or  values  of  butter  and  eggs  as  carried  on  by  the  Exchange  since  1903 
and  as  carried  on  through  the  Urner-Barry  mechanism  have  been  manipulated 
and  misrepresented  in  the  interests  of  a  few  members'  of  the  Exchange  who 
were  very  large  dealers  in  those  commodities  and  that  such  manipulations  and 
misrepresentations  have  been  injurious  not  only  to  the  producers1  and  con- 
sumers of  eggs  and  butter,  but  also  the  independent  dealers  and  many  of  the 
smaller  dealers  who  are  rmembers  of  the  Exchange. 

2.  That  one  of  the  important  factors  or  agencies  by  which  such  misrepre- 
sentation and  manipulation  in  fixing  the  prices  of  those  products  is  accom- 
plished is  the  practice  of  the  Exchange  in  establishing  so  many  complex  grades 
in  the  classification  of  the  grades  of  eggs  and  in  the  classification  of  the  grades 
of  butter  and  in  the  further  practices  upon  the  part  of  the  Exchange  through 
its  committees  in  mlaking  changes  in  those  classifications  and  in  the  scoring 
of  butter  from  time  to  time,  thereby  rendering  it  impossible  at  all  times  for 
shippers  to  know  just  what  classification  or  grades  a  particular  shipment  of 
either  commodity  would  come  under, 

3.  That  notwithstanding  the  object  of  said  Exchange  as  quoted  in  section  1 
of  its  by-laws  is,  "  inculcate  just  and  equitable  principles  of  trade  and  to  reform 
all    abuses    in  general    business/'    it    has    proven  that  there  is  conspicuously 
absent  any  greater  activity  upon  the  part  of  the  Exchange  in  punishing  its 
members  who  have  been-  convicted  of  inequitable  and  unjust  practices  in  trade 
as  illustrated  by  the  penalties  imposed  by  the  Exchange  upon  it  numbers 
who  had  been  convicted  of  dealing  falsely  and  fraudulently  with  the  United 
States  Government  and  for  filing  false  claims  for  damages  to  eggs  in  transit 
with  the  railroads  and  as  further  illustrated  in  the  punishment  imposed  upon 
Joseph  H.  Barrett,  one  of  the  official  butter  inspectors,  when  it  was  proven 
that  he  had  been  found  guilty  of  a  conspiracy  to  defraud  the  United  States 
Government  in  inspecting  the  quality  of  butter  sold  to  the  latter. 

4.  That  the  sales  of  butter  and  eggs  under  the  "  Call  "  in  the  Exchange  are 
infinitesimal  as  compared  with  the  wholesale  transactions  in  butter  and  eggs 
in  New  York  city;  that  the  sales  under  the  "Call"  each  day  are  so  limited 
that  they  cannot  be  a  basis  for  the  quotations  published  or  a  basis  of  any 
values  whatever   as  a  very  large  percentage  of  said   sales   do  not  represent 
actual  transactions. 

5.  That  the  control  of  the  butter  and  egg  market,  as  above  indicated  by  the 
Exchange,   is  really  in  the  hands  of   a  few  of  the  largest  members  of  the 
Exchange.    As  an  example  —  the  total  business  in  eggs  in  New  York  city  for 
the  fisical  year  ending  April  30,   1914,  was  estimated  by  the  accountants  at 


865 


$34,614,140.88  and  it  is  shown  by  them  that  twenty  receivers  and  packers 
handled  total  sales  of  $17,099,S>50.718  or  49.2  per  cent  of  the  year's  transac- 
tions in  eggs.  During  the  same  period  of  time  the  total  business  in  butter  in 
the  city  of  New  York  is  estimated  by  the  accountants  as  $48,706,982.40,  and 
that  the  sales  of  twenty  receivers  and  packers  amounted  to  $20,137,709.75  or 
41.3  per  cent  of  the  total  transactions  for  the  year.  (Scudder's  Report,  No.  8.) 

This  is  the  fourth  time  the  practices  of  the  Mercantile  Exchange  of  New 
York  city  have  been  investigated.  The  main  point  investigated  each  time 
was  whether  or  not  the  market  prices  of  eggs  and  butter,  as  published  by  th« 
Exchange  or  by  any  other  mechanism  based  upon  the  workings  of  the  Exchange 
were  honest  quotations  representing  the  actual  sales  and  the  conditions  of  the 
market.  In  each  instance  the  result  has  been  the  same,  viz.,  that  these  mar- 
ket quotations  were  not  honest  or  representative  of  the  actual  conditions  of  the 
market.  If  a  remedy  does  not  already  exist  by  which  these  practices  may  be 
either  regulated  or  prohibited,  then  it  would  seem  to  be  a  proper  matter  to 
be  submitted  to  the  Legislature  for  action. 

Under  the  law  the  testimony  taken  on  the  hearings,  after  having  been  signed 
by  the  witnesses,  must  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  clerk  of  the  county  of  New 
York.  Your  department  has  a  copy  of  the  testimony  and  I  will  return  the 
exhibits  to  your  office,  and  will  immediately  file  the  original  testimony  in  the 
office  of  the  clerk  of  the  county  of  New  York. 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

(Signed)     EDWABD  R.  O'MALLEY, 

Referee. 

28 


JOINT  REPORT  ON  FOODS  AND  MARKETS 


OF 


GOVERNOR  WHITMAN'S  MARKET  COMMISSION,  MAYOR  MITCHEI/S 
FOOD  SUPPLY  COMMITTEE  AND  THE  WICKS  LEGISLATIVE 
COMMITTEE. 


SIGNED  ON  BEHALF  OF  EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE 


Governor  Whitman's 

Market 
Commission 

GEORGE  W.  PERKINS, 
Chairman 

CHARLES  W.  WICKS, 

State  Senator 

S.  J.  LOWELL, 

Master,  New  York 
State  Grange 

CLIFFORD  S.  SIMS, 

Vice-President,  D.  & 
H.  R.  R.  Co. 

GEORGE  W.  WARD, 

Counsel 


Mayor  Mitchel's 
Food  Supply 
Commiittee 

GEORGE  W.  PERKINS,!'! 
Chairman 

L.  J.  LlPPMANN 

CARL  A.  KOELSCH 
JOHN  BUCKLE 
GEORGE  DRESSLER 
CYRUS  C.  MILLER 

W.  C.  MUSCHENHEIM 

M.  MAURICE  ECKSTEIN 
WM.  H.  CHILDS 


Wicks 
Legislative 
Committee 

CHARLES  W.  WICKS, 

Chairman 
N.  M.  MARSHALL 
M.  S.  HALLIDAY 

D.  J.  CARROLL 

E.  H.  MACHOLD 
W.  W.  LAW.  JR. 
H.  L.  GRANT 
D.  P.  WITTER 
FRANK  J.  TAYLOR 
GEORGE  W.  WARD, 

Counsel 


[867] 


•  . 


869 


JOINT  REPORT  ON  FOODS  AND  MARKETS 


December  28,  1916. 

Hon.  CHARLES  S.  WHITMAN,  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
Albany,  New  York: 

Dear  Governor  Whitman. —  Your  Committee  on  Market  Con- 
ditions in  this  State  begs  leave  to  report  as  follows : 

When  it  took  up  this  work  it  found  in  existence  in  New  York 
city  a  committee  known  as  Mayor  Mitchel's  Food  Supply  Com- 
mittee, which  had  been  conducting  an  investigation  of  this  subject 
for  more  than  two  years;  also  a  committee  created  by  the  Legisla- 
ture last  year  known  as  the  Wicks  Committee,  which  has  been  pur- 
suing an  investigation  into  the  question  of  dairy  products  in  this 
State.  Believing  that  these  two  committees  had  done  valuable 
work,  your  committee  immediately  sought  their  co-operation,  and 
this  has  been  given  in  the  most  cordial  possible  spirit. 

As  the  members  of  the  three  committees  have  come  to  the  same 
conclusion  regarding  the  causes  for  existing  conditions  and  the 
remedies  that  should  be  applied,  we  are  pleased  to  be  able  to  trans- 
mit herewith  a  report  which  is  jointly  submitted  by  the  members 
of  these  three  organizations. 

If  you  approve  of  our  recommendations  and  desire  that  a  bill 
be  prepared  substantially  along  the  lines  indicated  and  introduced 
into  the  Legislature,  we  would  respectfully  suggest  that  such  bill 
be  introduced  by  the  Wicks  Committee,  which  includes  several 
members  of  the  Legislature  and  which  has  performed  much  effi- 
cient work. 

Respectfully  yours, 

GEORGE  W.  PERKINS,  Chairman. 
CHARLES  W.  WICKS,  State  Senator. 
S.  J.  LOWELL,  Master,  New  York 

State  Grange. 
CLIFFORD  S.  SIMS,  Vice-President, 

D.  &  H.  Railroad  Co. 
GEORGE  W.  WARD,  Counsel. 


870 
JOINT  REPORT  ON  FOODS  AND  MARKETS 


Hon.  CHARLES  S.  WHITMAN,  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
Albany,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  We  have  the  honor  to  submit  the  following  report 
on  marketing  conditions  and  the  high  cost  of  foodstuffs  in  this 
State. 

There  are  numerous  causes  for  existing  conditions,  the  principal 
ones,  in  our  judgment,  being  as  follows: 

I 

AND  Tins  Is  FUNDAMENTAL 

The  lack  of  a  comprehensive  Market  Department  in  the  State 
and  the  absence  of  any  centralized  market  whatsoever  in  New  York 
city  and  most  of  the  other  centers  of  population  throughout  the 
State. 

Only  within  the  past  three  years  has  the  State  of  New  York  had 
any  market  department  at  all,  and  the  present  one  has  insufficient 
power  and  scope,  and  scant  financial  support. 

In  New  York  city  such  few  market  functions  as  exist  are  dis- 
tributed among  a  number  of  the  city  departments,  the  result  being 
that  what  is  everybody's  business  is  nobody's  business. 

Because  of  the  lack  of  proper  market  departments,  the  people's 
interests  in  this  all-important  matter  have  been  left  almost  wholly 
in  private  hands. 

This  is  in  striking  contrast  to  the  State's  policy  in  other  impor- 
tant activities  where  the  public's  welfare  is  concerned. 

For  example,  we  have  in  this  State  a  Department  of  Health, 
a  Department  of  Education  and  a  Department  of  Highways — 
each  with  broad  and  comprehensive  powers. 

We  also  have  two  Public  Service  Commissions  to  look 
after  the  people's  interests  in  the  matter  of  transportation, 
yet  it  is  estimated  that  but  10  per  cent  of  the  average  man's 
income  goes  for  transportation,  while  upivards  of  40  per  cent 
of  his  income  goes  for  food. 


871 

Every  once  in  a  while  we  have  a  sporadic  inquiry  into  the  ques- 
tion of  our  marketing  conditions  or  food  supply.  There  is  a  lot 
of  talk  and  much  publicity,  but  the  attempt  eventually  fades  away 
and  amounts  to  nothing,  largely  because  there  is  no  official  depart- 
ment empowered  to  inform  itself  fully,  eradicate  any  evils  that 
exist,  prevent  their  recurrence,  and  provide  better  methods. 

State  Should  Safeguard  People's  Food  Supply 

If  experience  has  shown  that  the  public's  interests  in  the  matter 
of  health,  education  and  transportation  need  to  be  safeguarded 
by  the  State,  through  supervision  and  regulation,  does  it  not 
follow  that  in  the  all-important  matter  of  their  food  supply  the 
people's  interests  should  also  be  safeguarded  by  the  State  in  a 
similar  manner? 

In  our  judgment  the  most  vital  necessity  is  the  immediate 
creation  in  this  State  of  a  Market  Department  of  proper  size, 
scope  and  power,  and  the  immediate  creation  in  our  cities  of 
market  departments  of  a  similar  character. 

Such  departments  could  do  much  to  modernize  antiquated 
methods  and  see  that  the  interests  of  the  producer  and  con- 
sumer were  safeguarded  and  protected  from  private  greed 
and  imposition,  in  much  the  same  way  that  the  Public  Serv- 
ice Commissions  safeguard  the  public's  transportation 
interests. 

It  could  also  have  additional  valuable  functions  such  as  are 
referred  to  in  other  parts  of  this  report. 

II 
EXPORTS  HAVE  INCREASED  PRICES 

While  the  cost  of  food  has  steadily  increased  during  recent 
years,  in  our  judgment  the  recent  sharp  rise  in  the  cost  of  food 
products  is  attributable  in  large  measure  to  the  European  war. 

The  vast  quantities  of  foodstuffs  shipped  to  Europe  have 
materially  reduced  our  supply  and  this  of  course  has  caused 
increase  in  the  price. 


872 


For  example: 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1914  the  United 

States  exported  breadstuffs  to  the  value  of.  .  $172,000,000 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1916  the  United 

States  exported  breadstuffs  to  the  value  of.  .  337.000,000 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1914  the  United 
States  exported  dairy  products,  such  as  Gut- 
ter, cheese,  condensed  milk  and  eggs,  to  the 
value  of 5,800,000 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1916  these  exports 

amounted  to  over 29,000,000 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1914  the  United 
States  exported  meat  products  to  the  amount 
of 97,000,000 

In  the  first  nine  months  of  1916  these  exports 

amounted  to 201,000,000 

While  our  exports  have  so  largely  increased,  our  production  has 

decreased. 

Bushels 
In  the  year  1914  the  production  of  potatoes  in 

the  United  States  was 410,000,000 

For  the  year  1916  it  was 300,000,000 

Yet  in  1914  the  United  States  exported  but.  .  1,700,000 

While  this  year,  to  October  1st,  it  exported.  .  .  2,700,000 

The  average  yearly  production  of  wheat  from  1910  to  1914  was 
728,000,000  bushels.  This  year  the  production  was  only  607,- 
000,000  bushels.  A  somewhat  similar  condition  exists  in  our  other 
crops.  With  an  extraordinarily  heavy  exportation  and  a  consider- 
ably decreased  production,  it  was  inevitable  that  prices  would 
advance. 

Ill 

IGNOBANCE  ON  THE  ENTIRE  QUESTION  OF  FOODSTUFFS 

In  New  York  city,  for  instance,  a  great  number  of  girls  leave 
the  public  schools  around  the  age  of  fourteen  and  fifteen.  They 
immediately  go  into  stores,  shops  or  factories.  In  a  few  years 
they  marry  and  start  housekeeping,  equipped  with  insufficient 


873 

knowledge  of  how  to  buy  food,  how  to  care  for  it  and  how  to 
prepare  it. 

These  housekeepers  know  little  or  nothing  of  the  value  of  foods 
from  the  nutriment  standpoint  The  result  is  a  great  waste  in 
every  direction. 

Two  years  ago  Mayor  Mitchel's  Committee  on  Food  Supply 
instituted  an  educational  campaign  in  New  York  city.  It  pre- 
pared and  distributed  various  circulars  touching  on  the  most  rudi- 
mentary questions  regarding  food  and  its  preparation.  These 
circulars  were  sent  to  the  public  schools  and,  after  a  brief  ex- 
planation by  the  teachers,  they  were  distributed  to  the  children, 
who  took  them  home. 

This  campaign  was  continued  for  a  number  of  weeks  and  about 
twelve  or  fifteen  million  circulars  were  distributed. 

The  response  from  the  housekeepers  was  prompt  and  significant, 
for  one  day's  mail  alone  aggregated  over  2,600  communications, 
all  clearly  showing  the  crying  need  for  education  of  the  most 
practical  sort  on  this  most  important  question. 

We  strongly  recommend  the  immediate  adoption  of  this  system 
by  the  State,  and  its  extension  and  application  throughout  the 
State. 

IV 

TBANSPOKTATION  AND  DISTRIBUTION 

The  facilities  of  the  State  in  this  respect  need  immediate  im- 
provement and  development.  The  State  now  has  much  the  same 
system  and  the  same  methods  that  were  in  vogue  a  number  of  years 
ago  when  the  population  of  its  cities  was  much  smaller. 

During  the  last  ten  years  millions  and  millions  of  dollars  have 
been  spent  in  New  York  city  to  enlarge,  improve  and  more  con- 
veniently locate  railroad  terminals  and  facilities  of  all  kinds  for 
transporting  people.  Great  and  expensive  terminal  stations  have 
been  built,  subways  and  tunnels  have  been  constructed,  and  a  vast 
amount  of  time,  thought  and  money  have  been  spent  on  the  trans- 
portation of  people. 

In  recent  years  over  $150,000,000  has  been  spent  to  increase  and 
improve  New  York  city's  water  supply;  but  practically  no  time, 


874 

thought  or  money  has  been  spent  to  enlarge  and  improve  our  facili- 
ties for  handling  food  supplies. 

New  York  city  in  recent  years  worked  out  and  perfected  a 
plan  to  widen  Fifth  avenue,  and  much  money  was  spent  to  gain  a 
few  feet  more  of  space  in  a  street  largely  used  for  pleasure 
vehicles;  while  necessary  improvements  in  West  street,  for  ex- 
ample, where  a  vast  amount  of  freight  coming  into  and  going  out 
of  New  York  city  is  handled,  have  not  been  made,  and  the  con- 
gestion has  now  reached  a  point  where  the  delays  are  so  great  as 
to  add  materially  to  the  cost  of  doing  business. 

Inadequate  Terminals  Make  for  High  Costs 

It  has  been  estimated  that  it  costs  very  much  more  to  transport 
a  pound  of  food  from  the  point  where  it  lands  on  reaching  New 
York  to  the  home  of  the  consumer  than  it  does  to  bring  it  by  rail 
from  Buffalo  to  New  York. 

For  example: 

The  present  inadequate  track,  yard  and  terminal  facilities 
of  the  New  York  Central  Railroad  are  a  serious  handicap 
to  the  producer  in  the  marketing  of  food  products  and  a  very 
large  factor  in  the  cost  of  distribution  of  these  products  in 
New  York  city. 

Interruption  of  traffic  at  and  north  of  Spuyten  Duyvil  and 
the  necessary  limitation  of  operation  on  surface  of  streets  and 
avenues  often  result  in  holding  up  the  delivery  of  a  thousand 
or  more  cars  at  a  time  north  of  Spuyten  Duyvil.  The  yards 
at  130th  street,  60th  street  and  30th  street  are  so  inadequate 
as  often  to  cause  150  to  200  cars  of  produce  at  a  time  to  be 
held  on  back  trains,  awaiting  placement  on  team  track.  Cars 
loaded  with  produce  are  sometimes  detained  in  these  yards 
on  an  average  of  five  days  beyond  the  free  time  of  two  days. 

The  consequence  is  a  large  additional  expense,  a  shortage 
of  produce  cars  and  the  issuing  of  embargoes,  with  such 
demoralization  that  farmers  often  hesitate  to  ship  to  New 
York  city  and  endeavor  to  seek  markets  outside  the  State. 

Negotiations  are  now  under  way  between  New  York  city 
and  the  railroad  with  a  view  to  correcting  this  unsatisfactory 


875 

condition,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  a  speedy  and  satisfactory 
understanding  can  be  arrived  at  bteween  the  city  and  the 
railroad  that  will  result  in  bringing  about  the  much  needed 
improvements. 

Similar  conditions  exist  with  practically  all  the  transportation 
companies  and  a  general  plan  of  co-ordination  between  them  should, 
as  far  as  possible,  be  worked  out. 

The  improvement  and  enlargement  of  existing  terminal  facili- 
ties and  the  addition,  where  necessary,  of  further  terminal  market 
facilities,  at  points  convenient  for  distribution,  would  reduce  the 
cost  of  handling  foodstuffs. 

The  present  methods  of  food  distribution  in  vogue  in  the  cities 
of  our  State,  especially  New  York  city,  are  very  costly  and,  in 
our  judgment,  could  be  greatly  improved  and  the  cost  reduced  if 
centralized  market  departments  were  given  sufficient  power  to 
modernize  existing  methods. 

Improved  terminal  facilities  would  not  only  reduce  the  ultimate 
cost  of  food  to  the  consumer  but  would  permit  dealers  to  do  busi- 
ness more  economically  and  would  provide  them  with  facilities 
for  doing  a  much  larger  business. 

A  recent  investigation  showed  that  in  one  block  in  New  York 
city  twenty  wagons  called  in  the  morning  for  grocery  orders  and 
called  again  in  the  afternoon  to  make  deliveries. 

The  waste  through  duplicate  service  and  the  congestion  in  our 
streets  because  of  duplicate  service  is  very  great.  We  believe  it  is 
possible  to  devise  a  system  by  which  a  large  amount  of  this  waste 
could  be  eliminated.  Certainly  an  attempt  in  this  direction  should 
be  made. 

V 

PUBLIC  MARKETS 

Much  has  been  said  of  the  need  for  public  markets  and  the  claim 
made  that  the  establishment  of  such  would  reduce  the  cost  of  food 
to  consumer.  This  is  a  question  that  should  be  studied  with  the 
utmost  care  before  any  large  amount  of  money  is  invested  in  such 
projects. 


876 

Many  consumers  in  a  city  like  New  York  have  the  idea  that  if 
public  retail  markets  were  established  where  farmers  could  drive 
in  and  offer  their  produce  for  sale  direct  to  the  consumer  it  would 
be  to  the  advantage  of  both  the  farmer  and  the  consumer. 

A  careful  investigation  shows  that  if  all  the  tillable  land 
available  for  farming  purposes,  located  near  enough  to  New 
York  to  be  reached  by  the  farmer  with  his  vehicle,  were  inten- 
sively cultivated,  it  would  produce,  under  the  most  favorable 
conditions,  less  than  5  per  cent  of  the  entire  amount  of  food- 
stuffs consumed  in  New  York  city. 

A  careful  investigation  also  shows  that  city  people  demand 
service ;  that  a  vast  amount  of  the  food  consumed  in  a  city  is 
ordered  by  telephone  and  delivery  required  at  all  hours  of 
the  day. 

We  believe,  therefore,  that  before  any  experiment  in  public 
retail  markets  is  undertaken  on  a  large  scale  at  the  public 
expense,  an  earnest,  intelligent  attempt  should  be  made  to 
improve  our  terminal  facilities  so  that  producers  from  up- 
State  and  other  parts  of  the  country  can  get  their  food  into 
New  York  city  and  get  it  delivered  more  promptly  and 
economically. 

In  this  connection  terminal  wholesale  markets  would  help 
materially. 

New  York  State  is  a  large  importer  of  food. 

Our  cities  bring  food  from  nearly  all  the  other  States  and  the 
world  at  large ;  they  bring  chickens  from  Texas,  butter  from  Cali- 
fornia and  eggs  from  China. 

Whatever  may  be  the  advantage  of  public  markets,  they  could 
not,  if  established,  materially  reduce  the  cost  of  food  without  im- 
proved transportation  and  terminal  facilities. 

These,  then,  are  among  the  first  prime  requisites,  whatever  the 
ultimate  method  of  serving  the  public  may  be. 


877 

VI 

DIFFICULTIES  WHICH  BESET  THE  FARMER 

The  fanners  of  this  State  have  many  just  causes  for  complaint. 
They  are  beset  with  innumerable  difficulties  in  getting  their  pro- 
duce to  market  in  such  a  way  as  to  receive  proper  compensation 
for  it. 

A  vast  amount  of  perfectly  good  food  goes  to  waste  in  this  State 
every  year  because  the  producer  cannot  realize  enough  for  it  to 
pay  for  sending  it  to  market. 

In  our  judgment,  this  is  largely  because  the  State  is  not 
equipped  as  it  should  be  to  render  assistance  in  the  way  of  infor- 
mation as  to  markets  and  protection  in  marketing.  A  broader 
system  of  distribution  would  enable  the  farmer  to  market  the 
product  that  now  goes  to  waste. 

What  a  City  Market  Department  Could  Do 

There  are  undoubtedly  many  producers  up-State  who  have  had 
the  experience  of  sending  produce  to  New  York  city  only  to  be 
informed  that  because  of  a  glutted  market,  poor  condition  on 
arrival,  or  for  some  other  reason,  it  sold  for  barely  enough  to  pay 
the  charges  for  getting  it  there. 

The  City  Market  Department  should  be  so  equipped  that,  when 
requested,  perishable  shipments  would  be  inspected  promptly  and 
a  certificate  issued  to  the  consignor,  testifying  to  the  exact  con- 
dition of  the  shipment.  And  it  might  be  advisable  in  working  out 
this  plan  to  give  such  a  city  market  department  power  to  place 
the  shipment  in  cold  storage  or  to  sell  it  at  public  auction. 

The  farmer  finds  that  many  tolls  are  taken  from  him  while  his 
produce  is  reaching  the  consumer  and  that  no  facilities  are  fur- 
nished him  by  the  State  to  insure  him  a  more  economical  handling 
and  distribution  of  his  products. 

City  People  Think  Farmer  is  Making  Large  Profits 

The  high  price  of  foodstuffs  has  made  the  city  people  feel  that 
the  farmer  must  be  making  a  large  profit,  but  this  has  not  been 
the  case.  On  the  other  hand,  the  farmers  feel  that  the  consumers 
are  engaged  in  an  attempt  to  force  down  the  cost  of  living  at  the 


878 

expense  of  the  producer.     They  feel  that  if  this  effort  continues 
it  will  surely  be  injurious  to  both  the  producer  and  the  consumer. 

Constantly  increasing  wages  to  the  laboring  men  in  the 
cities  are  causing  young  men  to  leave  the  farms  to  seek  more 
lucrative  positions  in  the  city. 

The  present  shortage  of  labor  on  the  farms,  due  to  the  high 
price  paid  to  labor  in  the  factories,  has  created  a  serious 
situation  for  the  farmer.  A  settled  feeling  is  coming  over 
the  boys  and  young  men  who  are  growing  up  on  the  farms 
that  the  State  and  the  cities  either  do  not  intend  or  are  power- 
less to  help  or  protect  them  in  obtaining  proper  markets  and 
fair  prices  for  farm  products.  They  see  very  high  retail 
prices  in  the  city  for  products  for  which  they  obtain  very 
low  prices.  They  see  a  constantly  growing  agitation  in  the 
city  to  drive  down  the  price  of  these  same  products. 

All  this  causes  them  to  shrink  from  taking  up  farming  as 
their  life  work.  This  is  a  most  serious  situation  which  only 
the  State  can  grapple  with  and  correct. 

In  addition  to  this  the  farmer  has  other  hardships.  This  spring 
in  our  State  the  rainfall  was  very  excessive,  with  a  low  tempera- 
ture. Then  came  a  protracted  drought,  coupled  with  extreme 
heat.  Under  these  conditions  full  crops  did  not  develop  and  many 
producers  who,  in  a  normal  season,  were  sellers  became  buyers. 

Exodus  from  Farms  a  Dangerous  Tendency 

The  difficulties  of  farm  life  in  New  York  State  require  broad 
study  and  co-operative  effort  on  the  part  of  the  State  and  the  city. 
If  this  is  not  given,  and  given  speedily,  the  exodus  from  the  farms 
to  the  cities,  which  has  never  been  so  great  as  during  the  past  year, 
will  become  a  serious  matter. 

It  is  all-important  that  the  State  do  all  it  properly  can  to  arrest 
the  tide  which  is  now  flowing  toward  the  cities  in  ever-increasing 
numbers,  and  to  induce  men  of  ability  to  seek  rural  life  under 
conditions  which  will  insure  a  fair  remuneration  for  their  efforts. 


879 

Profits  for  Farmers  Are  Essential  If  Men  Are  to  be  Kept  on  Farms 

We  must  recognize  that  no  satisfactory  system  of  feeding  our 
cities  can  prevail  unless  the  farms  are  successful,  and  that  it  takes 
as  much  brains,  hard  work  and  capital  to  pursue  farming  success- 
fully as  any  other  calling. 

The  period  of  land  exploitation  in  this  country  has  passed.  No 
large  bodies  of  new  fertile  lands  remain  to  be  taken  up.  From 
now  on  our  food  supply  must  come  by  the  much  more  laborious 
and  expensive  process  of  refinement  of  methods  and  through  bring- 
ing areas  of  poorer  land  into  cultivation. 

This  means  a  more  efficient  use  of  land  through  improved 
crop  practices,  such  as  better  soil  handling  and  more  approved 
cropping  methods;  through  the  more  careful  selection  and 
adaptation  of  crops  to  be  grown  and  the  breeding  of  new  and 
more  fruitful  varieties;  through  a  more  productive  animal 
industry;  through  the  redemption  of  waste  land  and  water 
areas. 

To  this  end  every  resource  should  be  employed  by  the  State 
to  increase  the  farmer's  efficiency  through  increased  intelli- 
gence concerning  his  profession. 

It  is  comparatively  easy  to  raise  crops  on  virgin  soil,  but  it  is 
quite  another  question  to  raise  them  on  impoverished  or  less  fer- 
tile soil.  In  the  future  we  will  have  to  apply  a  higher  intelligence, 
a  greater  skill  and  more  scientific  methods  in  our  agricultural 
endeavors. 

This  is  the  problem  that  Europe  has  had  to  face  for  a  long  time, 
and  she  has  made  great  strides  in  the  direction  of  solving  it  We 
can  undoubtedly  learn  much  from  her  accomplishments. 

State  Agencies  for  Agricultural  Education  a  Prime  Requisite 

State  agencies  for  agricultural  education  and  research  are  a 
prime  requisite  in  this  connection.  The  State  should  lose  no  time 
in  extending  the  work  already  under  way  at  its  various  agricul- 
tural colleges. 

We  recommend  that  these  institutions  be  instructed  to  submit 
plans  and  estimates  as  to  what  will  be  required  to  extend  their 


880 

facilities  in  the  way  of  additional  buildings  and  equipment  and 
the  securing  of  a  larger  staff.  Other  countries  are  far  ahead  of 
us  in  this  respect. 

For  instance,  during  the  last  five  years  the  little  country 
of  Norway,  with  a  cattle  population  of  1,100,000  expended 
$650,000  for  a  new  veterinary  college  and  equipment;  while 
New  York  State,  with  a  cattle  population  of  2,500,000,  has 
expended  less  than  $400,000  on  its  veterinary  college  and 
equipment  during  the  last  twenty  years.  Belgium  recently 
rebuilt  her  college  at  a  cost  of  $1,000,000;  Holland  has  a 
college  that  cost  nearly  $1,000,000  and  Germany's  many 
activities  in  this  direction  are  well  known. 

The  value  of  the  live  stock  of  this  State,  as  shown  by  the  United 
States  census  of  1910,  was  $246,000,000,  with  an  annual  loss 
from  disease  of  about  $25,000,000.  With  a  veterinary  service 
developed  to  the  degree  of  efficiency  that  has  been  attained  in 
European  countries  this  loss  could  undoubtedly  be  reduced  at  least 
50  per  cent. 

Money  Needed  for  the  Study  of  Animal  Diseases 

The  State  should  also  appropriate  more  money,  through  its 
veterinary  college,  for  the  study  of  the  causes  and  prevention  of 
animal  diseases  and  for  the  better  preparation  of  veterinarians  who 
are  to  become  the  advisers  of  live  stock  owners  and  through  whose 
knowledge  and  advice  the  startling  inroads  of  animal  diseases  upon 
the  production  of  meat  and  dairy  products  can  be  prevented,  and 
the  development,  upon  a  sound  basis,  of  the  stock-raising  industry 
of  the  State  can  be  promoted. 

In  1915  the  United  States  Department  of  Agriculture  gave  the 
total  value  of  New  York  State  live  stock  as  $236,000,000,  a  de- 
crease of  nearly  $10,000,000  in  five  years.  The  only  way  to  correct 
this  situation  is  through  practical  educational  methods  and  State 
bureaus  that  will  ascertain  the  most  modern  methods  in  vogue  in 
other  parts  of  the  world. 

Your  committee  does  not  believe  that  the  State  appropriates 
enough  money  or  employs  enough  men  of  sufficient  talent  to  assist 


831 

tihe  farming  community  in  the  prosecution  of  scientific  work  for 
the  further  development  of  the  farms  of  the  State. 

Now  that  the  Western  lands  of  our  country  have  nearly  all  been 
taken  up,  we  believe  the  time  is  ripe  for  this  State  to  render  all 
the  aid  it  possibly  can  and  offer  all  the  inducement  it  possibly  can 
to  people  who  will  engage  in  farming  on  either  a  small  or  large 
scale  in  this  State.  We  believe  that  no  better  investment  could 
be  made  on  behalf  of  the  people  than  appropriations  by  the  Legis- 
lature along  these  lines.  .  Good  roads  are  all-important;  canals  are 
all-important ;  but  the  most  important  thing  that  could  be  hauled 
over  these  good  roads  and  on  these  canals  is  produce  from  the 
farms. 

VII 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  INTERSTATE  RELATIONS  ON  MARKET 

QUESTIONS 

Interstate  relations  on  market  questions  are  of  more  importance 
to  the  State  of  ISTew  York  than  any  other  State  because  we  import 
more  foodstuffs  than  any  other  State.  At  present  there  is  no 
department  charged  with  the  responsibility  of  studying  this  ques- 
tion, assisting  our  merchants,  promoting  outside  markets  and 
collateral  work.  We  believe  this  matter  should  no  longer  be 
neglected  but  pursued  vigorously. 

REMEDIES 

STATE 

Department  of  Markets 

The  Committee  recommends  that  a  broadened  State  Depart- 
ment of  Markets  be  established. 

The  head  of  this  department  should  be  a  single  Commissioner 
appointed  by  the  Governor  and  the  department  should  be  equipped 
with  suitable  facilities,  among  other  things: 

1.  To  study  and  analyze  the  sources  and  methods  of  hand- 
ling the  food  supply  of  this  State. 

2.  To  keep  informed  of  and  make  public  the  amount  of 
foodstuffs  available  for  the  people  of  this  State,  and  the  rea- 
sonable costs  of  production  thereof. 


882 

3.  To  ascertain  and  make  known  to  the  people  of  the  State 
the  economic  and  nutriment  value  of  various  foods,  to  inform 
the  people  as  to  the  sources  of  supply,  and  to  provide  general 
information  which  will  tend  to  reduce  the  cost  of  living  and 
at  the  same  time  furnish  to  our  people  an  abundant  supply  of 
pure  and  wholesome  food. 

4.  To  issue  bulletins  whereby  the  people  may  be  accurately 
informed  from  day  to  day  of  the  current  market  prices  in 
different  parts  of  the  State  for  various  articles  of  food  sup- 
ply, and  the  probable  immediate  supply,  and  producers  and 
distributors  accurately  informed  of  actual  market  demands 
and  requirements  of  various  localities,  both  in  and  out  of  the 
State.     We  believe  this  sort  of  publicity  in  itself  would  go 
far  to  prevent  some  of  the  impositions  now  practiced  on  the 
purchasing  public. 

At  the  present  time  distrust  and  suspicion  exist  on  all  sides, 
largely  because  of  the  lack  of  accurate  information  as  to  exact 
conditions. 

Undoubtedly  abuse  and  misconduct  exist,  but  how  much  there 
is  and  how  it  can  be  minimized  or  stopped  can  only  be  ascertained 
through  a  permanent  centralized  department,  with  full  authority 
to  investigate  prices,  readjust  methods  and  institute  proper 
punishment  where  necessary. 

Neither  the  producer  nor  the  consumer  begrudges  transporta- 
tion companies  or  distributors  a  fair  profit,  but  they  both  strenu- 
ously object  to  being  imposed  upon  and  robbed.  No  private 
organization  can  satisfactorily  protect  them  in  these  respects ;  only 
the  State  can  perform  this  function. 

5.  To  prevent  the  publication  of  false  and  misleading  mar- 
ket quotations  and  insure  that  such  quotations  as  are  printed 
or  published  in  the  public  journals  or  market  papers  of  the 
State  are  correct  and  free  from  manipulation. 

6.  To  make  rules  and  regulations  prohibiting  the  manufac- 
ture or  sale  of  fraudulent  foodstuffs  within  this  State  either 
for  human  or  animal  consumption. 


883 

7.  To  prevent  the  use  of  dyes  and  coloring  matter  in  food- 
stuffs when  such  dyes  and  coloring  matter  are  designed  to 
deceive  the  purchaser  as  to  the  quality  or  kind  of  materials 
used  therein. 

8.  To  investigate  fully  into  the  production,  manufacture 
or  sale  of  all  foodstuffs  of  every  kind  offered  for  sale  or  in- 
tended to  be  offered  for  sale  in  this  State  and,  for  that  pur- 
pose, to  have  power,  by  subpoena,  to  compel  the  attendance  of 
witnesses  for  the  production  of  books,  papers,  documents  and 
other  evidence  before  the  State  Commissioner,  or  a  deupty 
or  special  officer  of  the  State  Department,  to  the  end  that  cor- 
rect and  accurate  information  may  be  secured  by  the  State 
Department  as  to  a  business  transaction  of  any  person  or  con- 
cern engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  or  traffic  in  foodstuffs 
within  the  State;  and  generally  to  have  such  other  powers 
and  duties  as  will  make  it  possible  for  the  State  Department 
to  provide  the  people  of  this  State  with  full  and  complete  in- 
formation as  to  all  phases  of  their  food  supply.     To  this  end 
the  broadest  possible  powers  should  be  given  to  the  State  De- 
partment of  Markets. 

MUNICIPAL 
Market  Departments 

We  recommend  that  each  municipality  in  the  State  be  author- 
ized by  law  to  create  such  adequate  market  departments  as  in  the 
judgment  of  the  people  and  authorities  of  such  municipality  are 
requisite  for  their  needs. 

We  recommend  that  the  Market  Commissions  or  Commissioners 
of  the  various  cities  be  appointed  by  the  mayors  of  the  cities  and 
that  in  such  cases  the  functions  now  existing  be  transferred  to  one 
centralized  city  market  department. 

The  city  of  New  York  is  without  a  proper  market  department. 
Such  changes  as  are  necessary  should  be  made  in  the  city's  charter 
as  will  permit  it  to  establish  a  proper  department  of  markets. 

In  the  other  large  communities  of  the  State  we  believe  it  will  be 
found  that  there  is  a  proportionate  need  for  the  creation  and 
development  of  market  departments. 


884 

INTERSTATE 
Market  Commissioner 

We  recommend  that  the  office  of  Interstate  Market  Commis- 
sioner be  established;  that  this  Interstate  Market  Commissioner 
be  appointed  by  the  Governor,  and  that  it  shall  be  his  duty  to  look 
after  interstate  marketing  conditions. 

We  suggest  that  the  Interstate  Commissioner  be  the  chairman 
of  a  State  Board,  so  that  in  cases  of  dispute  between  the  State 
Market  Department  and  the  City  Market  Departments  the  Inter- 
state Commissioner  could  act  as  a  referee  and  arbitrator. 

Among  the  duties  the  Interstate  Commissioner  could  per- 
form would  be  the  valuable  one  of  locating  markets  in  other 
states  for  produce  originating  in  New  York  State,  and  assist- 
ing the  producers  of  other  States  to  find  a  market  for  their 
produce  in  the  cities  of  this  State.  He  could  be  of  material 
assistance  in  working  with  other  states  and  the  Federal  gov- 
ernment in  securing  the  federal  regulation  and  aid  that  are 
so  much  needed  in  connection  with  questions  of  transporta- 
tion, standardization,  grading,  and  market  information  of  a 
general  character. 

STATE  BOARD  OF  FOODS  AND  MARKETS 

We  recommend  that  a  State  Board  of  Foods  and  Markets  (or  a 
commission  with  similar  title)  be  established ;  that  this  board  con- 
sist of  the  Interstate  Commissioner,  the  State  Commissioner,  the 
New  York  City  Commissioner  and  four  or  six  other  commissioners, 
to  be  appointed  by  the  Governor  from  different  sections  of  the 
State  to  represent  farming,  transportation,  and  other  interests. 

We  further  recommend  that  the  State  Board  be  given  as  broad 
powers  as  possible  to  deal  with  the  questions  of  transportation,  dis- 
tribution, terminals,  etc. 

CO-OPERATION  IN  BUYING  AND  SELLING 

We  believe  that  co-operative  agencies  by  which  collective  buying 
or  selling  may  be  conducted  are  economic  factors  of  great  import- 
ance and  should  be  permitted.  On  the  other  hand,  without  ade- 
quate State  control,  such  agencies  may  lead  and  have  frequently  led 
to  oppression  and  abuse. 


885 

The  State  has  sought  to  control,  in  part,  these  practices  through 
the  operation  of  the  so-called  Donnelly  Act,  a  statute  which  is 
intended  to  do,  within  the  State,  practically  what  the  Sherman 
Law  was  intended  to  do  in  the  Nation.  But  the  Donnelly  Act  is 
too  general  in  its  operation  to  reach  all  the  practices  complained 
of,  and  it  is  likewise  too  inclusive  as  to  prevent  desirable  co-opera- 
tion through  which  alone  great  beneficial  economies  can  ofttimes 
be  secured.  As  a  practical  proposition  the  act  is  unenforceable; 
as  an  economic  proposition  it  is  wasteful. 

Farmers'  co-operative  buying  and  selling  agencies  are  threatened 
\vith  dissolution  under  the  terms  of  this  act,  and  are  now  justly 
demanding  of  legislative  agencies,  upon  the  ground  of  economic 
necessity,  that  the  State,  close  its  eyes  to  their  modes  of  operation 
where  found  to  be  in  violation  of  the  existing  law,  or  that  laws  be 
passed  by  the  next  Legislature  exempting  their  economic  co-opera- 
tive endeavors  from  the  operations  of  the  present  laws. 

Co-operation  Inevitable 

Co-operation  is  inevitable.  We  are  all  practising  it  in  some  form 
or  another.  For  the  purpose  of  evading  certain  laws,  written 
agreements  have  been  largely  supplanted  by  telephone  and  other 
verbal  agreements.  Their  potency,  when  made  in  this  way,  is  as 
great,  in  many  cases,  as  when  reduced  in  writing.  It  is  high 
time  that  we  recognized  and  admitted  the  obvious  situation. 

As  long  as  we  know  perfectly  well  that  co-operation  exists,  it 
would  be  far  better  to  admit  it  and  require  that  it  be  practiced 
openly  and  legally  and  not  secretly  and  illegally. 

The  former  method  would  be  healthful  and  helpful ;  the  latter 
is  unhealthy  and  injurious. 

We  believe  that  the  State  Board  should  be  given  power  to  license 
co-operative  agencies  to  buy  and  sell  foodstuffs  of  all  kinds  and 
the  necessary  machinery,  materials  and  apparatus.  Concerns  so 
licensed  to  be  subject  to  State  supervision  as  to  capitalization  and 
full  publicity  as  to  methods  and  profits ;  all  fields  to  be  left  open, 
however,  to  free  competition.  All  forms  of  such  agencies,  corpor- 
ate bodies,  or  agreements,  to  be  submitted  to  and  receive  the  ap- 
proval of  the  State  Board,  and  only  allowed  to  continue  when 
found  that  they  are: 


886 

(a)  Calculated  to  reduce  costs  of  production  and  distribution, 

or  both; 

(b)  Not  calculated  to  depreciate  quality  or  healthfulness  of 

food  product  or  quality  of  service  by  distributor  or  to 
give  inordinate  profits ; 

(c)  Not  unjustly  discriminatory  between  persons  or  localities ; 

(d)  Not  injurious  to  the  trade  of  New  York  State  or  the 

public's  welfare. 

The  State  Board  to  have  the  right  to  revoke  any  license  for 
practices  detrimental  to  the  well-being  of  the  State,  or  to  for- 
bid specific  acts  found  to  be  unfair  competition,  or  in  undue 
restraint  of  trade,  or  otherwise  harmful.  Proper  provisions 
to  be  made  by  which  the  State  Board  can  apply  to  the  courts 
for  injunctions  when  necessary. 

It  is  not  the  intention  of  this  report  to  enter  into  all  the  details 
of  such  proposed  law,  as  the  same  is  receiving  further  study,  but 
to  indicate  the  general  outline  thereof.  In  anything  that  is  done 
care  must  be  taken  that  the  remedy  provided  does  not  prove  to  be 
worse  than  the  ills  sought  to  be  cured. 

Doubtless  many  of  our  difficulties  arise  through  methods  that 
are  the  result  of  injurious  competition. 

Our  object  should  be  to  preserve  the  benefits  that  come  from 
wholesome  competition  and  do  away  with  the  evils  of  ruinous, 
wasteful  competition. 

Substituting  co-operative  methods  means  giving  potential  power 
to  groups  of  individuals,  and  this  power,  as  we  know,  is  often 
used  to  the  detriment  and  not  for  the  benefit  of  the  public.  The 
closest  and  wisest  sort  of  State  supervision  and  regulation  must, 
therefore,  be  provided ;  regulation  that  will  prevent  undue  restraint 
of  trade  and  abuses  in  trade  but  that  will  permit  expansion  of  trade 
and  secure  for  the  public  the  benefits  that  come  through  co-opera- 
tive effort. 

Frank,  open  co-operation  means  maximum  economy. 


887 

Ruthless  Competition  Means  Economic  Loss 

Ruthless  competition  means  economic  loss  through,  duplication 
of  plants  and  wasteful  methods,  to  say  nothing  of  the  strong 
temptation  to  exploit  impure  goods. 

Unrestrained  competition  in  our  day  can  only  be  justified  as  a 
measure  to  protect  the  community  from  inordinate  profits  and 
artificial  limitations  placed  on  production ;  but  with  full  publicity 
as  to  conduct,  profits  and  the  like  and  with  the  industry  conducted 
under  State  regulation,  the  community  could  protect  itself  against 
these  dangers,  save  for  itself  the  existing  waste,  and  effect  econo- 
mies that  would  be  beneficial  in  reducing  prices. 

Legalized  co-operation,  publicly  controlled,  should  be  equally 
beneficial  to  producer,  distributor  and  consumer  and,  in  place  of 
driving  the  small  dealer  out  of  business,  should  make  it  possible 
for  him  to  do  a  more  profitable  business  through  eliminating  the 
waste  and  doing  away  with  unfair,  ruthless  competition.  It  would 
not  improperly  restrain  trade  and  throw  the  laboring  class  out  of 
employment. 

On  the  contrary,  experience  has  shown  that  proper  co-operation, 
through  saving  the  waste  and  increasing  the  volume  of  business, 
creates  additional  employment  for  all  classes  of  labor. 

MILK 

For  example,  we  believe  that  the  milk  industry  at  the  present 
moment  needs  to  be  handled  through  co-operative  effort.  Some 
time  ago,  conditions  reached  a  point  on  the  farms,  where  the  milk 
producers  felt  compelled  to  co-operate.  They  are  doing  this  in 
almost  open  defiance  of  the  Donnelly  Act. 

We  believe  they  should  be  allowed  to  co-operate,  but  under  State 
supervision  and  control,  with  their  plan  of  operation  made  known 
to  the  public  through  the  fullest  publicity  furnished  by  the  State 
Board. 

In  the  city  the  waste  in  the  delivery  of  milk  through  duplica- 
tion of  service  and  unnecessary  expense,  is  very  great. 

If  co-operation  on  the  part  of  distributors  were  allowed  and,  in 
turn,  co-operation  between  producers  and  distributors  permitted, 
unquestionably  a  very  large  saving  could  be  effected. 


888 

In  the  city  this  can  be  done  by  a  zone  system  of  delivery  that 
would  cut  down  the  delivery  cost. 

To-day  in  some  large  apartment  buildings  in  New  York  city 
the  janitor  or  someone  else  sells  the  privilege  to  deliver  milk  to  the 
tenants.  This  is  a  form  of  graft  that  imposes  on  both  the  mer- 
chant and  consumer.  It  would  automatically  disappear  if  there  were 
but  one  organization  for  the  delivery  of  milk. 

Take  another  instance,  viz. :  the  large  waste  that  now  takes  place 
through  the  non-return,  of  bottles.  This  waste  could  also  be  saved 
if  there  were  but  one  delivery  system. 

FISH 

Co-operation  could  be  applied  to  the  fish  industry  with  very 
beneficial  results. 

Thousands  of  tons  of  our  fish  are  annually  thrown  away  in 
harborss  or  turned  into  fertilizer  —  sometimes  to  further  the  pur- 
poses of  the  fish  dealers,  sometimes  because  there  is  no  demand 
from  the  public. 

To  a  very  great  extent  fish  is  used  but  one  day  in  the  week, 
whereas  it  should  be  used  every  day,  and  the  public  needs  educat- 
ing on  this  subject. 

If  co-operative  organizations  were  responsible  for  the  production 
and  distribution  of  our  fish,  vast  improvements  in  the  entire  in- 
dustry could  be  inaugurated.  The  saving  in  waste  would  be  very 
large  and  the  service  to  the  public  would  be  vastly  improved  —  all 
to  the  distinct  benefit  of  producer,  distributor  and  consumer  alike, 
both  in  quality  and  price. 

There  is  perhaps  no  one  article  of  food  used  by  the  people  of 
New  York  city  that  should  be  more  plentiful,  obtainable  in  better 
condition  and  at  a  more  reasonable  price. 

Far  more  attention  should  be  given  to  stocking  the  lakes  of  this 
State  with  fish,  and  to  their  care  and  protection. 

If  this  whole  industry  were  handled  through  co-operative 
method,  under  State  supervision  and  control,  in  place  of  under  the 
highly  competitive  methods  that  now  exist  without  supervision  and 
control,  a  vast  improvement  could  be  effected  in  a  very  short  time. 

The  pollution  of  the  waters  around  New  York  city  and  through- 
out the  State  during  recent  years  has  seriously  affected  our  supply 


889 

of  fish.     The  State  should  lose  no  time  in  taking  steps  to  remedy 
this  situation. 

COLD  STORAGE 

We  recommend  that  the  proposed  State  Board  be  given  supervi- 
sion of  the  manner  and  methods  by  which  foodstuffs  are  conserved 
from  the  time  of  over-production  to  the  periods  of  under-produc- 
tion. 

Such  proposed  State  regulations  should  not  be  so  unwise  or  op- 
pressive in  their  form  as  to  drive  these  necessary  agencies  from  the 
State  of  ~New  York  to  the  shelter  of  more  friendly  states,  but  rather 
to  promote  and  encourage  the  legitimate  use  thereof. 

The  proposed  State  Board  could  perform  no  more  valu- 
able service  than  that  of  encouraging  the  use  of  cold  storage 
as  a  means  of  equalizing  our  food  supply  and  the  cost  of 
same.  Investigation  shows  that  cold  storage  facilities  are  in- 
adequate and  should  be  enlarged  and  extended.  This  com- 
paratively new  device  can  be  made  a  great  boon  to  the  people. 

Under  present  conditions  abuses  undoubtedly  exist  which 
can  be  eradicated  through  the  wise  administration  of  State 
authority ;  and  it  is  highly  important  that  this  matter  be  taken 
up  in  a  constructive,  far-sighted  manner. 

COMMISSION  MEN 

The  commission  men  and  receivers  in  the  large  cities  have  come 
under  the  suspicion  of  both  the  producer  and  consumer  because  of 
certain  vicious  practices  on  the  part  of  a  small  percentage  of  their 
number,  and,  as  a  result,  the  honest  commission  men,  wholesale 
dealers  and  warehouse  men  suffer  from  the  ill-repute  brought  to 
this  great  body  of  business  men  by  the  practices  of  a  small  part 
thereof. 

Efficient  and  practical  State  supervision,  licensing  and  bonding 
should  be  provided  which  will  free  the  trade  from  the  operations 
of  this  small,  ill-disposed  group,  the  practices  of  which  are  injuri- 
ious  to  the  legitimate  commission  and  warehouse  men  as  well  as  to 
the  producer  and  consumer. 

We  are  convinced  that  the  great  majority  of  all  dealers  trans- 
act their  business  in  an  honest  manner  and  will  welcome  any  and 


890 

all  publicity  that  a  State  Department,  such  as  is  now  proposed, 
can  give  concerning  those  who  try  to  take  improper  advantage  of 
either  the  producer  or  consumer.  Such  publicity  would  eliminate 
the  abuses  and  lead  to  a  better  understanding  among  all  concerned. 

CENTRALIZING  DEPARTMENTS 

Various  isolated  State  functions  in  relation  to  foods  and  food 
traffic  are  now  provided  in  our  general  laws.  They  are  inadequate 
to  the  present  needs  and,  in  considerable  part,  fail  of  effectual  ad- 
ministration. In  some  respects  they  are  conflicting.  These  various 
provisions  should  be  brought  into  the  new  State  Market  Depart- 
ment. 

This  applies  particularly  to  the  Bureau  of  Weights  and  Meas- 
ures, some  of  the  provisions  of  the  present  Agricultural  Law  of 
the  State,  and  some  of  the  activities  now  devolving  upon  the  De- 
partment of  Health. 

We  believe  it  would  be  advisable  to  make  the  heads  of  the  De- 
partments of  Agriculture,  Health  and  Education  ex-officio  mem- 
bers of  the  State  Board. 

The  Governor's  Commission,  Mayor  MitcheFs  Committee,  and 
the  Legislative  Committee  have  had  various  phases  of  these  matr 
ters  under  consideration  and  have  had  available  the  information 
gathered  and  the  conclusions  reached  by  each  committee. 

After  numerous  joint  conferences,  the  three  committees  have 
reached  the  conclusions  and  recommendations  set  forth  above.  If 
our  joint  recommendations,  in  a  general  way,  meet  with  your  ap- 
proval, we  presume  that  the  next  step  will  be  the  preparation  of  a 
suitable  bill  or  bills  to  be  introduced  into  the  Legislature. 

If  this  be  your  desire,  we  suggest  that  such  a  bill  or  bills  be  pre- 
pared by  the  Wicks  Legislative  Committee  in  co-operation  with 
your  Commission  and  Mayor  Mitchells  Committee  and  introduced 
by  the  Wicks  Committee  as  promptly  as  possible  when  the  Legis- 
lature convenes. 


891 


Most  respectfully  yours, 


On  behalf  of  Governor 
Whitman's  Market 
Commission: 

GEORGE  W.  PERKINS, 

Chairman 
CHARLES  W.  WICKS, 

State  Senator 
S.  J.  LOWELL, 

Master,  New  York 
State  Grange 

CLIFFORD  S.  SIMS, 

Vice-President,  D.  & 
H.  R.  R.  Co. 

GEORGE  W.  WARD, 

Counsel 


On  behalf  of  the  Execu- 
tive Committee  of 
Mayor  Mitchel's  Food 
Supply  Committee: 

GEORGE  W.  PERKINS, 

Chairman 
L.  J.  LIPPMANN 
CARL  A.  KOELSCH 
JOHN  BUCKLE 
GEORGE  DRESSLER 
CYRUS  C.  MILLER 

W.  C.  MUSCHENHEIM 

M.  MAURICE  ECKSTEIN 
WM.  H.  CHILDS 


On  behalf  of  the  Wicks 
-t  Legislative  Committee : 

CHARLES  W.  WICKS, 

Chairman 

N.  M.  MARSHALL 
M.  S.  HALLIDAY 

D.  J.  CARROLL 

E.  H.  MACHOLD 
W.  W.  LAW.  JR. 
H.  L.  GRANT 
D.  P.  WITTER 
FRANK  J.  TAYLOR 

GEORGE  W.  WARD, 

Counsel 


Approved  by  Food  and  Market  Committee  of  New  York  State 
Mayors'  Conference. 

(Signed)  GEORGE  R.  LUNN, 

Chairman. 
SCHENECTADY,  N.  Y.,  January  4,  1917. 


CONCLUSION 

For  the  past  five  weeks,  this  Committee  has  been  engaged  in 
connection  with  the  representatives  of  the  foregoing  committees 
and  with  Mr.  Robert  C.  Oummings  and  Frank  B.  Gilbert  in  the 
preparation  of  a  comprehensive  bill  creating  the  Department  of 
Agriculture,  Foods  and  Markets  of  the  State  of  New  York.  This 
bill  is  designed  to  create  a  commission  endowed  with  ample  powers 
and  facilities  to  remedy  all  unsatisfactory  conditions  in  this  report 
shown  to  exist. 

That  this  or  any  bill  will  bring  about  an  ideal  situation  is  not 
claimed  for  it.  That  it  will  bring  satisfactory  State  supervision 
and  regulation  is  intended  and  believed.  That  it  will  encourage 
and  promote  the  dairy  industry  of  the  State  of  New  York  is  one 
of  its  main  purposes.  That  there  is  a  vital  need  for  the  exercise 
of  State  functions  of  the  sort  proposed  by  this  bill  is  acknowledged 
by  all  thoughtful  men  who  have  considered  the  subject.  The  Com- 


892 


mittee  asks  at  the  hands  of  this  Legislature  careful  consideration 
of  the  questions  involved  and  solicits  aid  in  the  solution  of  these 
problems  by  support  of  the  measure. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

CHARLES  W.  WICKS, 

Chairman, 
H.  E.  MACHOLD, 

Vice-  Chairman, 

N.  M.  MARSHALL, 
MORRIS  S.  HALLIDAY, 
DANIEL  J.  CARROLL, 
WALTER  W.  LAW,  JR., 
HENRY  L.  GRANT, 
DANIEL  P.  WITTER, 
FRANK  J.  TAYLOR, 
GEORGE  W.  WARD,  Counsel 


OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


